[MondayBlues]

Demanding the right to exist is not irrational.

Exactly! It is the same demand made by the Palestinians!

So, these two States must find a way to co-exist, or there is no peace and no "right" to exist for either.

[NudiJuicervich]

I disagree. Many Jewish people are tired of the on-going and unjust war, and are ready to recognize that Palestinians have rights, just as they do.

Any reasonable person would recognize that. This may not be accomplished, but at least the unconditional support of Israel by the U.S. seems to be coming to an end. And not too soon.

Indeed. A large percent of the 'Jewish left', if you will, in the Dem's base support being even out of the West Bank altogether. The Jewish conservatives tend to be GOP and that includes a large percent of the Zionist types.

An interesting factor here, and one that we're not privy given it's within the government back channels, is what goes on by and between Israel's Ambassador to the US, Michael Oren. He's a former US citizen who was born and raised in the US and has taught university classes in the US at various times. He was required by Israel to renounce his US citizenship which he did with much sadness in order to accept the assignment which--according to him--allowed him the chance to cement a truly solid US-Israeli relationship that also solves the Israel-Palestine crisis. Oren believes that his US and Israeli background will be useful for doing so. He's long held these positions:

. . .

But now Mr. Oren is putting his intellect and persuasive powers into the service of a right-wing Israeli government that does not see eye to eye with the White House. Judging from Mr. Oren’s writing and lectures, it is not clear he is completely eye to eye with his new bosses either.

He is on the record as supporting Israel’s unilateral disengagement from Gaza, a decision that led Mr. Netanyahu to leave the government of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in 2005. He has also said Israel must withdraw from its settlements in the West Bank, to save itself as a Jewish state.

. . . The Saturday Profile - Israeli Ambassador Draws on American Roots - Biography - NYTimes.com

In obviously thorny problems like these, plenty of posing and posturing is often required given the tip-toes through the mine fields of all the involved aggressive, inflexible and belligerent hotheads. Netanyahu picked an ambassador who is known to have these different sentiments from his own Likud Party where the Zionist hotheads reside. Oren is also tapped for working with Obama. Too bad I can't look behind the curtains as to what's going on, but the signs indicate there could be some calculated moves being made even between them and Palestinian leaders (maybe even Hamas, etc, leaders who privately would like a deal but must deal with those who don't) to set up a stage for solutions and working the angles around hard line opponents of all sides.

[houkbsdov]

Exactly! It is the same demand made by the Palestinians!

So, these two States must find a way to co-exist, or there is no peace and no "right" to exist for either.

The difference being Israel didn't and doesn't threaten anyone's existence until attacked.

The Arabs have blown it four times, and don't lack for land. They need to take their pawns back to their side of the Jordan.

[SannyGlow]

Obama endorses support for Palestinian State & pre 1967 borders. A move that will infuriate Israel.

It took real balls for that one,making the coming election the most important in at least my lifetime.

Money VS the People !

I don't understand. Where is the money interest, and where is the people interest?

[SannyGlow]

Supporting the idea of a Palestinian state, and reworking Israel's borders, will likely infuriate many of the American Jews (estimates as high as 78%) who voted for Obama in 2008. Jews I know, while they were fully behind Obama in 2008, will not, under any circumstances, vote for him in 2012.

The question needs to be asked by every lib out there: Did Obama just jeopardize a second term?

Jews I know would never vote Republican. Many Jews think that the curren conservative Israeli government is a strategic disaster. Many Jews are conservative, head-in-the-sand nationalist pigs who prefer war to compromise, but many are pragmatic enough to understand that peace will only come through compromise.
And compromise means giving up the West Bank, giving up many settlements, and giving up half of Jerusalem.

[SannyGlow]

Its a simple thought exercise. What is likely to happen to Israel without defensible borders?

The answer is another Holocaust. If one is opposed to that, then one must oppose this. If one is not, when one is a genocidal maniac.

What a world you inhabit. Everything is black and white. Really simple.

But for me, the more I understand about the world, the less black and white things are, and the more greys tend to creep in.

Why does Israel have to have borders that include the West Bank? Do you really think that Jordan is an existential threat to Israel?

[SannyGlow]

Exactly! It is the same demand made by the Palestinians!

So, these two States must find a way to co-exist, or there is no peace and no "right" to exist for either.

Well said.

[SannyGlow]

The difference being Israel didn't and doesn't threaten anyone's existence until attacked.

Israel rests upon occupied land (I'm talking about the post-1967 part).

There are only two nations in the world who don't act like they understand that simple concept: Israel and the US.

[evalayCap]

Where is Alma so I can say "I told you so"? The Golan heights are not Israel's, they belong to Syria and as long as Israel inhabits them they will be in a state of war. Palistinian's have a right to a nation of their own just as Israel. Obama just gave a message to every Syrian demonstrating againsed Assiad, the US and Israel are not your enemy if you choose not to be ours. We made Israel in '47, we must fix the mistakes we made for our own security and that of the world. This "Arab Spring" could be a blessing or a curse, I say we take advantage of the situation and make a positive future instead of chicken little politics.

[houkbsdov]

What a world you inhabit. Everything is black and white. Really simple.

But for me, the more I understand about the world, the less black and white things are, and the more greys tend to creep in.

Why does Israel have to have borders that include the West Bank? Do you really think that Jordan is an existential threat to Israel?

Your apparent inability to understand simple concepts does not make them complicated.

Israel is attacked 4 times in 25 years, forces the aggressors back every time.

What part of that equation makes you think the Arabs deserve anything back?

[houkbsdov]

Israel rests upon occupied land (I'm talking about the post-1967 part).

So, the Arabs can threaten and wage war, but if they lose, we are suppose to pretend nothing happen?

[incimisiche]

No wonder they waged war so often. They knew there was nothing to lose. Until Israel stayed on the land, now the Arabs know that war means you lose land. So they don't wage war anymore, at least not conventionally.

The President's speech included no changes. A Palestinian state based on pre-1967 borders has been US policy for some time now. And such a policy is still vehemently opposed by the Palestinians.

As for money vs. the people, that's just dumb. The people favor Israel, at least in this country.

[Plaumpholavup]

I'm not really sure what Obama said is anything different than the past. That's what the Arabs concluded. As for the borders, he said the 1968 borders with 'swaps' based on what's happened since then. If anything, that's a bad deal for the Palestinians given what Israel has and might be willing to 'swap'--if it's even willing to do so--is likely to be unpopulated desert areas in exchange for the choice lands they have settled in the West Bank. That's especially so concerning the Jerusalem area that Israeli hardliner expansionists desire the most, which is the biggest contested area where the Palestinians want the traditionally Arab East Jerusalem as its capital for ethnic, historical and religious reasons that is increasingly and intentionally encircled by Israeli settlements.

Lets compare that with our border, and the land we took from Mexico and the Indians. With the Indians we took everything they had, and claimed it ours. So how many years do you want to go back. Did we not conquer this land we live in.? Should we now give it back?

[Pharmaciest]

*stands up and cheers*

Bravo, bravo, well done Mr. Obama, and a pox on Mr. Netenyahu, who attempted to pre-empt our president on his own vessel, by seekin' to address congress before our president proposed his plan to the american peoples. the nerve...

if Isreal wants to continue thar belligerent policies in the West Bank, so be it. they be the captains 'o thar own vessel....but if they don't want to play nice with our skipper, they can stop expectin' thar 3 billion dollar per year gift from our taxpayers.

*puts his foot down*

aye!

- MeadHallPirate

[Mmccqrtb]

And meanwhile, Netanyahu has rejected a palestinian state based on the 1967 borders, has rejected the removal of settlements, and just while he is in Washington, ministers from his governement inaugurate a new settlement, probably not a coincidence :


After Obama speech, Netanyahu rejects withdrawal to 'indefensible' 1967 borders - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

Israeli ministers inaugurate new Jewish settlement in East Jerusalem - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

[incimisiche]

Netanyahu is rejecting something Obama has not proposed.

[Mmccqrtb]

Obama also said that Hamas has to recognize Israel. That is a pretty major big deal. If Hamas recognizes Israel then Israel can find a way to accept the old borders with land swaps, involving gaining land with buildings, for giving up desert lands.

Hamas has declared a truce not to put obstacles in the road towards a palestinian state, Hamas has accepted negotiations ("prepared to give peace with Israel a chance") and Fatah ( the palestinian peace camp under Abbas) to be in charge of them and pledged to honour the outcome of such negotiations, should they ever resume. Hamas has also said to favour a "palestinian state in Gaza and the West Bank" which amounts to an implicit recognition of Israel. That should for rational people be enough to start talks. It is your enemies after all with whom you are negotiating peace, therefore it makes no sense to build up new and new preconditions. ( There are two threads under International politics)
Hamas speaks no more for all Palestinians than the Tea party speaks for all Americans. It makes no sense to make it sound as if there was only Hamas at the table.
The israeli governement on the other side also consists of quite a number of hatemongerers, settler activists and radicals, for example organizing public prayers for the death of all Palestinians ( the Schas partys spiritual leader, Rabbi Ovadia Joseph) or demanding the execution of arab members of the Knesset ( FM Lieberman). Or to give another example : The present israeli governement has honoured a Rabbi who has issued an appeal not to employ Arabs, and not to rent to Arabs ( something that should sound familiar to Jews with ancestry in Europe).

Shas spiritual leader: Abbas and Palestinians should perish - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

Lands conference awards Safed rabbi who said Jews shouldn't rent to non-Jews - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

[ebonytipchik]

President Barack Obama on Thursday made official the long-held but rarely stated U.S. support for a future Palestinian state based on borders that existed before the 1967 Middle East war.

Obama calls for Israel's return to pre-1967 borders - CNN.com

I guess the fawning Obama fans in this thread missed the fact that this is not a new policy. It's not something President Obama came up with.

Matt

[incimisiche]

What I want to know is what happens when the Palestinian state attacks Israel. The Israelis would defeat it and occupy it. What happens then? are they supposed to just leave?

[ebonytipchik]

It is an interesting point. If Palestine is a state, and the Hamasholes continue indiscriminately shelling Israel with rockets, is the Palestinian state accountable for that action? Or do they get to say "Oops, some rowdy guys got carried away. It's not our fault" and get a pass?

It certainly won't work the other way, if the Israelis attack Palestinian civilians again.