View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Fri Nov 21, 2014 11:59 am



Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 
 PM slams Obama call for ‘Palestine’ based on ’67 lines 
Author Message
Phinfever Owner/Admin
Phinfever Owner/Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:41 am
Posts: 9128
Location: Raleigh, NC
Post PM slams Obama call for ‘Palestine’ based on ’67 lines
One thing the world learned under Bill Clinton was that Arabs do not want Israel to just give back the land, they want them to all to die. I think they should keep the land.


Quote:
PM slams Obama call for ‘Palestine’ based on ’67 lines
By HILARY LEILA KRIEGER AND HERB KEINON
05/20/2011 00:40

"Those borders are not defensible," PM rages as he flies off to Washington; Palestinian state must not come "at Israel’s expense"; US President urges resumed talks, focused on territory, security.

Talkbacks (91)
A day before their scheduled meeting in Washington, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and US President Barack Obama staked out dramatically conflicting positions Thursday as to the path for resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Netanyahu issued a quick, bitter response on Thursday night to Obama’s landmark Middle East speech, saying that the establishment of a Palestinian state could not come “at Israel’s expense.”

RELATED:
Analysis: PM finds more jarring, than pleasing, in Obama’s speech
Right wing MKs: Obama is the new Arafat
Abbas calls emergency meeting over Obama address
In Arab world, disappointment Obama didn’t go further

“The Palestinians, and not only the US, must recognize Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people,” he said.

Obama, in his address earlier in the day on the changes sweeping the Middle East, called for a demilitarized Palestinian state along the 1967 lines with agreed upon land swaps.

While thanking Obama for his commitment to peace, Netanyahu said he “expects to hear from President Obama a reconfirmation of commitments to Israel from 2004 that received wide support in both houses of Congress.” This was a reference to a letter from president George W. Bush to prime minister Ariel Sharon that did not call for a return to the 1967 lines, and that recognized that any agreement would take into account the changed realities on the ground – a line interpreted by Israel to mean a recognition that it would hold on to the large settlement blocs.

The Bush commitments, said Netanyahu, “deal with Israel not being asked to withdraw to the 1967 lines, which are not defensible, and which place large population centers in Judea and Samaria outside of these borders.”

Netanyahu’s statement also said that the Bush letter made clear that Palestinian refugees would be absorbed in a future Palestinian state, something that was not explicitly mentioned in Obama’s speech.

“Without a solution to the refugee issue by settling them outside of Israel, no territorial concessions will end the conflict,” the statement read.

In a wide-ranging address at the State Department, Obama devoted considerable attention to the Israeli-Palestinian issue, whose peaceful resolution he called “more urgent than ever,” and pushed back against those who have said the current tumult precluded a serious peace process.

“While the core issues of the conflict must be negotiated, the basis of those negotiations is clear: a viable Palestine, a secure Israel,” the president declared. “We believe the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states.”

Though he stressed that the United States can’t impose a solution, “what America and the international community can do is to state frankly what everyone knows – a lasting peace will involve two states for two peoples: Israel as a Jewish state and the homeland for the Jewish people, and the state of Palestine as the homeland for the Palestinian people.”

Obama fleshed that out further by saying that Palestinians should have “a sovereign, nonmilitarized state” and that there must be provisions for stopping terrorism and weapons smuggling, and ensuring border security. He called for a “full and phased withdrawal” of the IDF to be coordinated with the Palestinians during a transition period with a clear duration and demonstrated security effectiveness.

“These principles provide a foundation for negotiations,” Obama said. “Palestinians should know the territorial outlines of their state; Israelis should know that their basic security concerns will be met.”

He pointedly skipped making any prescriptions on the “wrenching and emotional” issues of Jerusalem and Palestinian refugees but argued that “moving forward now on the basis of territory and security provides a foundation to resolve those two issues in a way that is just and fair.”

Obama’s comments codify long-standing American policy in a more explicit and detailed format than his predecessors offered. George W. Bush was the first to call for a Palestinian state, and later referred to “mutually agreed changes” to the 1949 armistice lines as its basis, in the 2004 letter to Sharon.

The greater significance of Obama’s comments is likely to come in how they are perceived by both parties, as well as what they indicate about the United States’ intentions on shepherding the peace process.

Though the US has not been engaged in active diplomacy since the Palestinians left the talks last year, this could signal an effort to raise the profile of US involvement in the issue.

It comes at a time when the Palestinians are threatening to go to the UN with a unilateral declaration of statehood, a move that concerns Israel and is sure to be a subject of discussion when Netanyahu arrives at the White House on Friday.

Obama strongly rebuked the Palestinians for this tactic on Thursday, saying, “Symbolic actions to isolate Israel at the United Nations in September won’t create an independent state.”

He warned Palestinians that “efforts to delegitimize Israel will end in failure” and that they would “never realize their independence by denying the right of Israel to exist.”

He chastised both sides for taking steps that don’t help the peace process.

“Israeli settlement activity continues. Palestinians have walked away from talks,” Obama said. “The world looks at a conflict that has grinded on and on and on, and sees nothing but stalemate.”

Israel has expressed doubt that any progress toward negotiations can be made for the time being with the recent announcement of a Palestinian unity government that will include Hamas.

Obama acknowledged these concerns when he referred to the unity deal as raising “profound and legitimate questions for Israel” and emphasized that “in the weeks and months to come, Palestinian leaders will have to provide a credible answer to that question.”

Elsewhere, he said, “Palestinian leaders will not achieve peace or prosperity if Hamas insists on a path of terror and rejection.”

He stressed American support for Israel: “Our friendship is rooted deeply in a shared history and shared values. Our commitment to Israel’s security is unshakeable. And we will stand against attempts to single it out for criticism in international forums.”

He continued, “But precisely because of our friendship, it’s important that we tell the truth: The status quo is unsustainable, and Israel too must act boldly to advance a lasting peace.”

Obama added, “The dream of a Jewish and democratic state cannot be fulfilled with permanent occupation.”

Referring to Obama’s statement about Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people, the Prime Minister’s Office said the Palestinians and not only the US need to recognize that as a fact.

Netanyahu also said that he will make clear in his meeting with Obama that Israel will need to remain on the Jordan River, and that he was disappointed by Fatah’s reconciliation with Hamas.

While Obama noted the emotive nature of the Palestinian issue for the broader Arab world, he also criticized dictators for deflecting attention from their autocratic rule by focusing on Israel.

“Antagonism toward Israel became the only acceptable outlet for political expression,” he said.

His speech was delivered in response to the Arab uprisings against these autocracies, and Obama pledged American support for those who sought democracy and freedom.

“There must be no doubt that the United States of America welcomes change that advances self-determination and opportunity,” he said.

“Yes, there will be perils that accompany this moment of promise. But after decades of accepting the world as it is in the region, we have a chance to pursue the world as it should be.”

He stressed, “The status quo is not sustainable. Societies held together by fear and repression may offer the illusion of stability for a time, but they are built upon fault lines that will eventually tear asunder.”

Obama criticized Syrian leader Bashar Assad for firing on his own citizens, who have taken to the streets to demand such self-determination.

But he didn’t refer to Assad as illegitimate, much less call on him to go, as he has with other Arab leaders in similar positions, as some had speculated he would before the speech.

Instead, Obama said, “President Assad now has a choice: He can lead that transition, or get out of the way. The Syrian government must stop shooting demonstrators, and allow peaceful protests.”

He also called on Assad to “start a serious dialogue to advance a democratic transition,” warning that “otherwise, President Assad and his regime will continue to be challenged from within and will continue to be isolated abroad.”

He spoke of significant American aid to help Egypt and Tunisia reach democracy, and spoke of the need for religious freedom and rights for women throughout the Arab world.

Obama concluded with his comments on the peace process, and used the experience of bereaved Israelis and Palestinians who chose to seek reconciliation rather than violence as a message for the greater region.

“That is the choice that must be made – not simply in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but across the entire region – a choice between hate and hope; between the shackles of the past and the promise of the future,” he said. “It’s a choice that must be made by leaders and by the people, and it’s a choice that will define the future of a region that served as the cradle of civilization and a crucible of strife.”


http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPoliti ... ?id=221397

_________________
PHINFEVER FACEBOOK - JOIN US!

Image


Fri May 20, 2011 1:47 pm
Profile WWW
Phinfever Owner/Admin
Phinfever Owner/Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:41 am
Posts: 9128
Location: Raleigh, NC
Post Re: PM slams Obama call for ‘Palestine’ based on ’67 lines
Quote:
Face to face, Netanyahu rejects Obama on borders

In his speech, Obama gave unprecedented prominence to a long-held U.S. stand that Israel opposes: A Palestinian state should be shaped around the border lines that existed before the 1967 war in which Israel took control of the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem. An essential part of what Obama proposed was that Israelis and Palestinians would also have to agree to swaps of land to account for Israeli settlements and other current conditions, a point Netanyahu failed to mention.
"While Israel is prepared to make generous compromises for peace, it cannot go back to the 1967 lines," Netanyahu declared. "These lines are indefensible."
As they sat together for public comments after their private meeting, Obama sought to put the disagreement in the best light, and in the context of a relationship of two allies — one, however, showing strains of impatience.
[ For complete coverage of politics and policy, go to Yahoo! Politics ]

"Obviously there are some differences between us in the precise formulations and language," Obama said. "That's going to happen between friends."
He quickly added in a reassurance to Netanyahu: "What we are in complete accord about is that a true peace can only occur if the ultimate resolution allows Israel to defend itself against threats, and that Israel's security will remain paramount in U.S. evaluation of any prospective deal."
Obama and Netanyahu showed cordiality before the cameras. The president listened intently, his hand cupping his chin, as Netanyahu spoke passionately about his country's plight and how the path to peace should run.
"Remember that, before 1967, Israel was all of nine miles wide," Netanyahu said, emphasizing his words with his hands. "It was half the width of the Washington Beltway. And these were not the boundaries of peace; they were the boundaries of repeated wars, because the attack on Israel was so attractive."


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_obama_mideast

_________________
PHINFEVER FACEBOOK - JOIN US!

Image


Sat May 21, 2011 10:07 am
Profile WWW
Phinfever Global Moderator
Phinfever Global Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 6:53 pm
Posts: 3889
Location: Palm Beach County, Florida
Post Re: PM slams Obama call for ‘Palestine’ based on ’67 lines
I dont think any country has ever given back land obtained thru war. Im not to keen on the 67 war but wasnt Israel attacked from all sides by Arab nations & basically beat them?? I seem to remember from school that when Israel was formed the Arab nations said they would push them into the sea ... dont think that strategy has worked.

_________________
Extend Philbin!
Enough already , this is the best regime in the NFL ...by far!!
2014 Lazor Powered... THE MAKING OF A DYNASTY!!


Sat May 21, 2011 11:21 am
Profile
Phinfever Rookie
Phinfever Rookie
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 1:55 am
Posts: 70
Post Re: PM slams Obama call for ‘Palestine’ based on ’67 lines
This is the most stunning betrayal of an ally I can possibly imagine. Just another example of Obama choosing despots over democracy. I hope Obama realizes that trying to force Israel into anything could cause civil unrest here at home.


Sat May 21, 2011 8:30 pm
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:11 pm
Posts: 8957
Location: Fargo, ND
Post Re: PM slams Obama call for ‘Palestine’ based on ’67 lines
Obama is letting ideology get in the way of reality. These two sides will NEVER get along. There is no such thing as world peace, and forcing our ally to give up land they gained in a fight they didn't start (1967) is pure lunacy. It's not going to happen so don't waste time and energy pretending that it is a viable option. He is straining relationships with a strong ally and making himself look naive and foolish in the process.


Sun May 22, 2011 1:02 am
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 3:56 pm
Posts: 3137
Location: MA.
Post Re: PM slams Obama call for ‘Palestine’ based on ’67 lines
AP
WASHINGTON — Israel's leader, trying to defuse reports of a crisis with the U.S. over his rejection of President Barack Obama's proposed foundation for future Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, said Saturday that media accounts of the disagreement have been "blown way out of proportion."

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had bluntly criticized Obama's call earlier this week to base future negotiations on Palestinian statehood on Israel's boundaries before it captured the West Bank, east Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip in the 1967 Mideast war. He publicly reiterated that opposition while sitting beside Obama in the Oval Office on Friday.

On Saturday, Netanyahu stood firm by his insistence that Israel could not withdraw to its prewar lines, negotiate with a Palestinian government including violently anti-Israel Hamas militants or repatriate allow millions of Palestinians to homes in Israel that they or their families fled or were driven from during the fighting over Israel's 1948 creation.

But he told The Associated Press that media accounts of the disagreements "have been blown way out of proportion."

'We can't go back': Israeli PM rejects 1967 border proposal
"It's true we have some differences of opinion, but these are among friends," Netanyahu said.

"There should be no doubt about the strength of the American-Israeli relationship and President Obama's commitment to Israel and its security," he added.

In a Mideast policy speech on Thursday, Obama gave unprecedented prominence to Washington's long-held stand on the future borders of Israel and a Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza and east Jerusalem. Although his comments did not substantively differ from previously articulated U.S. positions, he sent shudders through the Israeli leadership by acceding to Palestinian pressure to explicitly enunciate this stance.

An essential part of what Obama proposed was that Israelis and Palestinians would also have to agree to land swaps that would allow Israel to hold on to major Jewish settlements, a point Netanyahu failed to mention when he declared the 1967 lines to be militarily "indefensible."

From the very first days of his presidency, Obama has been pushing hard to wring an elusive peace agreement from Israel and the Palestinians, who stopped negotiating in late 2008, save a brief period this past September.

The Palestinians have not yet indicated whether his public statement on their hoped-for state's borders would be enough to bring them back to the negotiating table and drop their campaign to have the U.N. recognize their state unilaterally in September, a move both the U.S. and Israel oppose.


Sun May 22, 2011 6:53 am
Profile
Phinfever Rookie
Phinfever Rookie
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 1:55 am
Posts: 70
Post Re: PM slams Obama call for ‘Palestine’ based on ’67 lines
Phin wrote:
Obama is letting ideology get in the way of reality. These two sides will NEVER get along. There is no such thing as world peace, and forcing our ally to give up land they gained in a fight they didn't start (1967) is pure lunacy. It's not going to happen so don't waste time and energy pretending that it is a viable option. He is straining relationships with a strong ally and making himself look naive and foolish in the process.



Well said :yay:


Tue May 24, 2011 6:30 pm
Profile
Phinfever Owner/Admin
Phinfever Owner/Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:41 am
Posts: 9128
Location: Raleigh, NC
Post Re: PM slams Obama call for ‘Palestine’ based on ’67 lines
IndyPhin wrote:
Phin wrote:
Obama is letting ideology get in the way of reality. These two sides will NEVER get along. There is no such thing as world peace, and forcing our ally to give up land they gained in a fight they didn't start (1967) is pure lunacy. It's not going to happen so don't waste time and energy pretending that it is a viable option. He is straining relationships with a strong ally and making himself look naive and foolish in the process.



Well said :yay:


Totally agree, but I was struggling with the thought of giving back all the land we took from the "Indians" here. But then, shouldn't they give it back to whomever they took it from?

_________________
PHINFEVER FACEBOOK - JOIN US!

Image


Wed May 25, 2011 8:54 am
Profile WWW
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:11 pm
Posts: 8957
Location: Fargo, ND
Post Re: PM slams Obama call for ‘Palestine’ based on ’67 lines
Big Dave wrote:
IndyPhin wrote:
Phin wrote:
Obama is letting ideology get in the way of reality. These two sides will NEVER get along. There is no such thing as world peace, and forcing our ally to give up land they gained in a fight they didn't start (1967) is pure lunacy. It's not going to happen so don't waste time and energy pretending that it is a viable option. He is straining relationships with a strong ally and making himself look naive and foolish in the process.



Well said :yay:


Totally agree, but I was struggling with the thought of giving back all the land we took from the "Indians" here. But then, shouldn't they give it back to whomever they took it from?

Yea thats certainly not 'politically correct' Big Dave. ;-)
I agree, the Northern Native Americans that were here in the 1500s and later were certainly NOT the first people in North America. They also took land from one another; how far do we want to go back here?
Don't get me wrong, what those early settlers and our government did to the natives was wrong in how they handled things, but it happened over a hundred years ago. It's time to move on.


Thu May 26, 2011 11:36 am
Profile
Phinfever Newbie
Phinfever Newbie

Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 3:08 pm
Posts: 17
Post Re: PM slams Obama call for ‘Palestine’ based on ’67 lines
Well let's face it the border lines prior to 1967 were already unfair to the Palestinians. I actually like Obama taking a hardline on israeal because let's face it thee continued settlements and denial of palestinian rights and land is pretty abhorrent. Will 1967 lines actually happen no, this problem cant be solved to the palestinians liking because well Israel's continued to take and take and take from them since the early 1900s and drive Palestinians out. This is not an excuse for Palestinian retaliation but Israel can't help but expect it when their entire history was based on growth at whatever the cost without concience. Ethnic cleansing will piss people of go figure.


Wed Oct 12, 2011 5:46 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 10 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007, 2010 phpBB Group.
Designed by Coots & IamPZ - Phinfever.com.