Almost, But Not Quite Incredulous
David Limbaugh ·
May 19, 2011 at 10:54am
When I heard Obama had thrown Israel under the bus -- again -- and actually gone so far as to tell Israel to pull back to its 1967 borders to make way for a Palestinian state, even I couldn't quite believe it. But it appears he did in fact mean precisely that. So where is the outrage?
- Comment (26)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (5)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Re: Almost, But Not Quite Incredulous
He didn't say that, and what he said was basically an affirmation of what every administration has said since the '67 war.
Re: Almost, But Not Quite Incredulous
Here's what he said:
There really wasn't a word that could be construed as "throwing Israel under a bus." No idea where Fox got that.
Oct '10
Re: Almost, But Not Quite Incredulous
Claire, that's a relief.
Jun '10
Re: Almost, But Not Quite Incredulous
"Agreed swaps" means no swaps, which means no agreement. That's how it always plays out.
I believe, before 1967, when East Jerusalem was under Jordanian control, Christians were not allowed to buy any additional property there, and if you had a Christian school, you could only teach in Arabic. And you certainly couldn't teach any Muslims about Christianity.
Dec '10
Re: Almost, But Not Quite Incredulous
Pretty much every peace deal put forward by Israel to the Palestinians since Oslo has envisioned that the Palestinians would have well over 90 percent of the West Bank and Gaza -- some as much as 99+ percent -- with adjustments to the 1967 borders based on swaps of equal acreage. Israel has always insisted that it retain sovereignty over the area on the border of Jordan to ensure that it can prevent arms from entering the West Bank.
However, since Israel ceded control of the Philadelphi Corridor separating Egypt from Gaza to Egypt, that may mean that a peace deal will require that Israel get that control back -- because Egypt cannot be trusted to keep arms out of Gaza. If the road to peace between Israel and the Palestinians leads through Cairo, I hope that Israeli tanks won't have to traverse it to convince the Egyptians of the value of peace.
Re: Almost, But Not Quite Incredulous
East Jerusalem. That's what it's about. We can pretend it's about anything else we want, but both sides want East Jerusalem, and can't stand the thought of the other side having it.
IT will never end.
Apr '11
Re: Almost, But Not Quite Incredulous
How is that different when you consider the source of the quote. The President's comments should not put Israel at ease.
Claire Berlinski, Ed.: Here's what he said:
There really wasn't a word that could be construed as "throwing Israel under a bus." No idea where Fox got that. · May 19 at 11:10am
Re: Almost, But Not Quite Incredulous
Claire Berlinski, Ed.: Here's what he said:
There really wasn't a word that could be construed as "throwing Israel under a bus." No idea where Fox got that. · May 19 at 11:10am
Claire: It doesn't bother you that he wants to return to the '67 boundaries?
Re: Almost, But Not Quite Incredulous
Every administration since '67 has said Israel should revert to '67 borders? What?
Re: Almost, But Not Quite Incredulous
See this piece by Dore Gold quoting President Reagan as saying "I can't ask Israel to return to its pre-1967 borders." What am I missing?
Jan '11
Re: Almost, But Not Quite Incredulous
I think you're discounting what is meant in this phrase, David.
"with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states."
Ohlmert, expressed a willingness for essentially what Obama described. Netenyahu has made some similar noises. There is plenty of wiggle room in what Obama said.
Jan '11
Re: Almost, But Not Quite Incredulous
This is exactly what the Nobel committee was hoping for when they awarded Obama the award; they were hoping for an American President to abandon Israel. So, it seems he deserves his reward after all.
Edited on May 19, 2011 at 1:06pmRe: Almost, But Not Quite Incredulous
BThompson: I think you're discounting what is meant in this phrase, David.
"with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states."
Ohlmert, expressed a willingness for essentially what Obama described. Netenyahu has made some similar noises. There is plenty of wiggle room in what Obama said. · May 19 at 1:02pm
How can Israel possibly be "secure" if they return the land?
Jul '10
Re: Almost, But Not Quite Incredulous
Overheard in Tahrir Square, Cairo:
"So, did ya hear Obama's speech?"
"Does that guy ever show up on time?"
"Golf, Beyonce - he's Johnny on the Spot...."
"Anyway, I caught part of of it. Yadda, yadda...billion dollars...gripping stuff..."
"Yep. The more things change. Hey, whatta ya doin' tonight?"
"Eh, mosque, beat my wife..."
"Me and Ahmed and some guys are gonna go burn a church if you wanna come...."
"I'm totally there, brother..."
Edited on May 19, 2011 at 3:24pmJan '11
Re: Almost, But Not Quite Incredulous
I suppose it depends on what land is returned. Presumably portions that Israel needs to maintain security would be kept in exchange for portions of land inside the green line that aren't necessarily crucial to security. I don't know that Obama is proposing anything different from what Olmert offered, as described in this article.
http://www.forward.com/articles/121260/
Also, from the wikileaks documents, Netanyahu himself expressed openness to the idea of swapping land.
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/world/50779112-68/netanyahu-swaps-cable-anonymity.html.csp
Edited on May 19, 2011 at 1:26pmJan '11
Re: Almost, But Not Quite Incredulous
David, I'd also point out that Obama isn't talking about the pre-1967 borders. He's talking about the 1967 borders after the war.
Re: Almost, But Not Quite Incredulous
Yes, I saw and wondered about that. I need to review the precise borders pre and post. Thanks.
Re: Almost, But Not Quite Incredulous
David I think your first reaction was correct.
The AP and Fox are both reporting Obama endorses going back to pre-war borders.
From Fox:
Obama, in a sweeping address tackling the uprisings in the Middle East and the stalled peace process, stunned Washington and Jerusalem by endorsing Palestinians' demand for their own state based on the pre-1967 borders.
Re: Almost, But Not Quite Incredulous
I must not be too far off. "Israeli PM Quickly Rejects Obama's Border Demands: 'Indefensible.'"
Re: Almost, But Not Quite Incredulous
Tommy De Seno: David I think your first reaction was correct.
The AP and Fox are both reporting Obama endorses going back to pre-war borders.
From Fox:
Obama, in a sweeping address tackling the uprisings in the Middle East and the stalled peace process, stunned Washington and Jerusalem by endorsing Palestinians' demand for their own state based on the pre-1967 borders. · May 19 at 2:24pm
Yes, Tommy -- and that seems to be what is reported on the Blaze via the link on my immediately preceding post -- re Bibi's rejection of Obama's demand. So thanks.