Definitely the worst time being US allies.

For (probably) the first time, I agree with you both here, but Obama is already starting to subtly backpedal.

 

The truth of the matter is that there is very little incentive for Israel to accept a dramatic shift in its borders and security situation for a number of reasons.

 

a) they have largely managed to establish boundaries (and real 30' concrete barriers) that offer protection from traditional Hamas/intifada methods.

 

b) Any agreement they make with a palestinian state (frankly whether hamas is a member or not) is only as good as the paper it is written on, it won't remove the pathological hatred against Jews and a Jewish state that exists and is fuelled by other arab states as a means of waging proxy wars on Israel.

 

c) They have NO intention of allowing ancestoral refugees (as Netenyahu said) back into Israel proper, they have their own ideological reasons for denying them this, reasons that I largely agree with.

 

d) Netenyahu is actually in no position to make any real concessions anyway becuase it would rapidly lead to the collapse of his coalition government.

 

e) Once Israel cedes land, is there any process by which normalisation of relations between a Jewish and Palestinian state could happen to the point that Palestinians will no longer support Hamas? IMV there's none whatsoever, Israel knows all too well that they will make compromises that will not be reciprocated in kind by a lessening of hostility or rhetoric, that's a lesson they've learned repeatedly, there's absolutely no desire on the part of the majority of Palestinians or their backers in the arab world for a peaceful outcome that includes an Israeli state and Palestinian state living in harmony, that is cloud cuckoo land.

 

f) Israel rightly concludes that a large part of the "issue" that is its existence owes very little to the plight of the Palestinians and very much indeed to the chagrin the entire arab world feels at having to suffer a Jewish state in their Islamic neighbourhood, that's the reality here, and the fact that the global media never highlights the ACTUAL reasons that despite everything else that occurs in the region, Israel is somehow the universal "baddie".

 

g) The facts of the six day war act as a deterrent to hostile powers in the region, They do not believe that those nations who had previously tried to invade and slaughter the entire population and lost have any claims on land they lose in the process, whether or not the UN sees it that way I'm inclined to agree.

 

h) They're not stupid, they know the realities differ from the MSM depiction, there are genuinely things that could be done to improve the plight of the palestinians but the vast majority of those start with the Palestinians (and the arab world), if they choose to live under the most corrupt and repressive scum like Hamas then what incentive is there for Israel to actively change the situation bar an existensial threat, it doesn't matter what they do it won't affect the fact that the entire region uses them to enflame sentiment, the hatred is persistent and real, and no short term peace arrangements (doomed to fail) will change that.

 

Therefore I conclude Barack Obama must be doing this either as a nod to Arab states knowing that, like all before it, the words will come to nothing, or because he severely misreads the situation and mindset of Israel, historical and present.

 

Either way, I don't think it matters, AIPAC thankfully still has real influence in both senate and congress.

 

R

Arab states don't care about the plight of Palestininan Arabs. They abused the Palestinian Arabs and denied any path from refugee to citizenship, or any other legal status in their countries. Israelis government treat Palestinian Arabs better than most other Arab countries, to such a degree that recent polls in East Jerusalum revealed that most Palestinian Arabs rather be Israeli citizens than under Fatah or Hamas rule.

 

Israel, in the eyes of Arab statesmen, is the perfect bogeyman.

 

On the other hand, I have no idea who other than Valerie Jarrett can come up with this ill-thought policy blunder in the White House. Bill Daley certainly would not let this happen, given his experience and position in ranked Democrats. So wouldn't Joe Biteme. Neither Robert Gates and Panetta are that stupid, and not a word from HRC about this, even though she would be the prime executor of the policy. The emergent visit by Netanyahu and the news briefing is a slap in the face to Obama. Funny things have happened.

 

As for AIPAC, it has lost support among non- or less- religious (which means leftist) American Jewish communities over the past few years. The leftist propaganda paint Israel as imperialistic, colonialist, racist and apartheid state, and, for some complicated reasons, the most educated Jewish communities in the US somehow buys into it, as exemplified by Noam Chomsky and his crazy talk. They are still powerful to a certain degree, but not as omnipotent as the leftists or Islamists want people to believe.

 

After all, the Elders of Zion is the perfect Bogeyman, no matter where he is.

 

 

"Note how Obama has undermined Israel?s negotiating position. He is demanding that Israel go into peace talks having already forfeited its claim to the territory won in the ?67 war — its only bargaining chip. Remember: That ?67 line runs right through Jerusalem. Thus the starting point of negotiations would be that the Western Wall and even Jerusalem?s Jewish Quarter are Palestinian — alien territory for which Israel must now bargain.

The very idea that Judaism?s holiest shrine is alien or that Jerusalem?s Jewish Quarter is rightfully or historically or demographically Arab is an absurdity. And the idea that, in order to retain them, Israel has to give up parts of itself is a travesty.

Obama didn?t just move the goal posts on borders. He also did so on the so-called right of return. Flooding Israel with millions of Arabs would destroy the world?s only Jewish state while creating a 23rd Arab state and a second Palestinian state — not exactly what we mean when we speak of a ?two-state solution.? That?s why it has been the policy of the United States to adamantly oppose this ?right.?"