Turning blind men into lepers OR another Obama miracle.

Ishmael

Literotica Guru
Joined
Nov 24, 2001
Posts
84,005
I don't know how many of you have been following the recent events regrading this administrations new policies regarding the mid-east, but the short synopsis is that once more Obama has opened his mouth and created even more chaos and strife in a region already blessed(?) with more than it's fair share of those two entities.

The worst part about the latest round is that it was wholly uncalled for, and coming from a man whose intelligence allegedly transcends that of us mere mortals, and one of the stupidest acts of international diplomacy I've seen from a developed nation leader in my lifetime. Obama basically stepped forth and took the Palestinian position in almost every particular only a few days before the scheduled visit of Israels elected leader, Benjamin Netanyahu. Perhaps Obama was under the impression that by his stepping forth and making the pronouncement that Israel would bend their knee, perhaps he envisions himself as Jean luc Piccard on the bridge of the Enterprise and merely has to wave his hand and utter, "Make it so" and shit magically happens.

Whether by magical means or not, we are all well aware that "shit" did indeed happen. The first event was celebration on the Arab street, then Bibi (Netanyahu) basically got in the presidents face and said, "not happening on my watch." Bibi then went before congress and delivered a rousing speech that essentially took our young and naive president to the woodshed while at the same time encapsulating the recent history of mid-east politics and policies. Subsequent to that speech the Palestinians (Hamas) accused Bibi of delivering a "declaration of war." (Which in itself is absurd in that the Hamas Charter calls for the eradication of the Jews, not just from Israel, but from the face of the earth. That portion of the Charter makes any declaration of war more of less redundant. It would be roughly akin to Hitler expressing outrage that the US declared war on Germany after Germany had already declared war on the US.)

Obama, and his foreign policy people, should have known what Israels response was going to be and totally avoided any public statement concerning those negotiation points. It doesn't matter which side of the issue you may find yourself standing on, it is just bad politics to make announcements regarding foreign policy until you have the agreement of all of the concerned parties. On the other hand this should come as no surprise to anyone what with Obama's track record of shooting off his mouth without knowing the facts going back to the Cambridge incident and the resulting 'Beer Summit.' (Maybe he can have a coffee and hooka summit to try to smooth this one over?)

Rather than having moved any ongoing peace process forward, Obama seems to have found a way to set it back several steps, hence the reference to having turned a blind man into a leper.

Obama has done nothing on the international scene to further the interests of the United States or the cause of world peace. His sole success story, the death of bin Laden, wasn't even an act of international diplomacy but was a continuation of the Bush policy regarding the disposition of bin Laden. In other words his one perceived success came about from the fact that he did nothing, just got out of the way. (Even then he turned it into some sort of cabinet level reality show not unlike a scene out of Clancy's "Patriot Games.")

The man is clumsy, dangerous, and not altogether bright.

Ishmael
 
vetteman said:
The man looks like a fool.

That's because the man IS a fool.

It's what happens when his advisers and mentors are anti-Jew.

Thankfully, he's already starting to backpedal ... "what I meant by that is ...." at the AIPAC conference.

Netanyahu's experienced diplomacy saved Obama from the humiliation and scorn he deserves by voicing support from the United States, knowing that letting him off the hook will serve Israel in the long run.
 
Time for a field trip!

House members side with Netanyahu

House lawmakers from both parties are siding with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over President Obama in their differing approaches to the Israel-Palestine border dispute.

Obama last week called for Israel's 1967 borders to mark the "foundation" for renewing stalled peace talks between the two sides – a concession to Palestine that Netanyahu has bluntly rejected, including in remarks to a joint meeting of Congress Tuesday.



Rep. Robert Andrews (D-N.J.) said Tuesday that Obama is "tilting toward Hamas" – a reference to the Palestinian group the United States and Israel consider a terrorist organization. He emphasized that Congress would never base its approach to Israeli aid on such a position. "A majority of the Congress disagrees with him,” Andrews said of Obama.

Rep. Austin Scott (R-Ga.), for one, said the president "absolutely … made a mistake" with his 1967-borders proposal, and suggested it would harm — rather than bolster — the chances of renewed peace talks. "With all of the political turmoil and unrest in the Middle East, I don’t understand why the president injected himself into that issue right now," he said.

Both Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), the House Democratic whip, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) have also rejected Obama's proposal in recent days, telling the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) that preconditions have no place in the negotiations. "No one should set premature parameters about borders, about building or about anything else," Reid said Monday night to roaring applause.
 
Yes, that and pointing out that Israel already is a democracy, defends itself and should be considered the one right thing about the Middle East that the rest of the turmoil in the region is striving for.
 
Obama is a textbook example of a true incompetent. They always surround themselves with other incompetents. If he had decent advisors he wouldn't be saying such stupid things.
 
He made some good points in his speech, one of which was, of the 300 million Arabs in the Middle East the only truly free Arabs with democratic rights live as citizens in Israel.

Which explains why he's so anxious for them to disappear.

Does anyone here think Obama would come to the aid of Israel if they were on the verge of being wiped out?
 
I guess you all can't handle the truth. As far as your prognostication about whether this was a good foreign policy move or not - I'll let history decide that.
 
I guess you all can't handle the truth. As far as your prognostication about whether this was a good foreign policy move or not - I'll let history decide that.

Are you going to share this "truth" with us or just leave us guessing?

Ishmael
 
The truth is you would not be happy with Obama if he cut all taxes to zero, lowered gas to 5 cents a gallon, and lightly played with your balls while sucking your cock.

The decision that every move Obama makes is fucked up was made far before the election. You and your cronies look at every event reflected through a conservative house of mirrors.
 
You of all people should know that sometimes you have to kick the ass in order to get it to move. There was no "ongoing peace process" in Israel, if you haven't noticed.

And it's odd that Obama has beefed up military aid to Israel, if he wants to see them disappear.
 
The truth is you would not be happy with Obama if he cut all taxes to zero, lowered gas to 5 cents a gallon, and lightly played with your balls while sucking your cock.

The decision that every move Obama makes is fucked up was made far before the election. You and your cronies look at every event reflected through a conservative house of mirrors.

Feel better now that you've relieved yourself of that load of bullshit?

Ishmael
 
Are you going to share this "truth" with us or just leave us guessing?

Ishmael

Sure - the truth is that unless the border dispute is on the table the Palestinians won't come back to the table. He chose to stir the pot because the whole process has calcified in the last 20 years. I recognize that we can, and should, debate the timing and the method of President Obama's delivery of that message, but doesn't some time have to pass before we can render absolute judgement?

Look at it from the Palestinians point of view: England shows up at the end of WW2 with a bunch of gunships and drives them out of the land they have been living on for 2,000 years because of some oral history from over 3,000 years ago said that "god" gave the land to the Israelites? You'd be pissed off to. And you'd want your land back.
 
Feel better now that you've relieved yourself of that load of bullshit?

Ishmael

You are wrong. My words are as true as words get. You just do not want to hear them.

Keep smashing the guy. It works for you. It also fuels the fire(s) at Lit were there is no political discussion, only yelling and screaming.
 
The truth is you would not be happy with Obama if he cut all taxes to zero, lowered gas to 5 cents a gallon..

Yeah like that's gonna happen anytime soon :rolleyes:

The truth is you loonies are so blinded by your bias that you simply refuse to see this guy as the incompetent leader and liar that he truly is.






....
 
Last edited:
You are wrong. My words are as true as words get. You just do not want to hear them.

Keep smashing the guy. It works for you. It also fuels the fire(s) at Lit were there is no political discussion, only yelling and screaming.

No I'm not petey, you are. I will continue to attack him on policy just as I did Bush. It really is that simple. You are trying to make the case that I'm attacking him because I personally don't like the guy. That is patently false, I might even like the guy were I to sit down and have a beer with him. But I'd still attack his policies.

Ishmael
 
Sure - the truth is that unless the border dispute is on the table the Palestinians won't come back to the table. He chose to stir the pot because the whole process has calcified in the last 20 years. I recognize that we can, and should, debate the timing and the method of President Obama's delivery of that message, but doesn't some time have to pass before we can render absolute judgement?

Look at it from the Palestinians point of view: England shows up at the end of WW2 with a bunch of gunships and drives them out of the land they have been living on for 2,000 years because of some oral history from over 3,000 years ago said that "god" gave the land to the Israelites? You'd be pissed off to. And you'd want your land back.

The 'truth' is that the border, and repatriation, are not on the table. Any more than the return of Texas and California are on the table in any talks we might have with Mexico. Or any more than France and Southern England are on the table in any discussion with Italy. Or any consideration that the US return to colonial status in discussions between the UK and China.

The fact that Obama, unilaterally, decided to try to put them on the table doesn't mean that that is going to happen. As a matter of fact those matters were taken off the table within minutes of his attempt. That being the case, why bother? He's done nothing more than aggravate what is already a bad situation.

Going all the way back to the Oslo accords, remember those, Israel has asked nothing more than that those parties that they are negotiating with acknowledge Israels right to exist as a state. The PLO refused to remove the 'elimination' of Israel from their charter, Hamas went one step further and included the elimination of the Jews as a people in their charter. So, you tell me where the starting point for negotiations begins?

Ishmael
 
Back
Top