Obama Throws Israel Under the Bus (Again)
By Ken Falkenstein | Thursday, May 19th, 2011 | PolicyIt is time for the American Jewish community to wake up and recognize that Barack Obama is the first blatantly anti-Israel American president in history. Israel’s survival may well depend on his defeat in 2012:
Obama announced today his position that a Palestinian state must be based on Israel’s pre-1967 boundaries. If this were to occur, the distance from the Mediterranean Sea to the eastern border with “Palestine” would be 13 miles – which is less than half the distance of my commute home from work. Virtually every military expert agrees that such boundaries would be indefensible and would pose a dire threat to Israel’s existence – which is exactly why the Palestinians are demanding it.
“As Americans have been seared by hostage taking, violent rhetoric, and terrorist attacks that have killed thousands of our citizens – a failure to change our approach [in the Middle East] threatens a deepening spiral of division between the United States and Muslim communities,” Mr Obama added.
Obviously the “change” that Obama is implementing to appease the Muslim world is to throw our ally Israel under the bus. If the American Jewish community does not wake up and withdraw their support from him immediately, he just might succeed.
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
Ken Falkenstein has been a staffer in the United States Senate and the Virginia House of Delegates. He has managed political campaigns. He was a military intelligence analyst in the U.S. Army in West Germany during the Cold War. He is currently the Vice President of the Down Syndrome Association of Hampton Roads and practices as a civil litigation attorney with the law firm of Poole Mahoney PC in Virginia Beach. His concern for his kids' future is what most informs his writing.
Comments
32 Responses to "Obama Throws Israel Under the Bus (Again)"
INFURIATING… what a naive, simplistic, defeatist approach to Middle Eastern policy.
Disgusting. And pathetically weak to an ally. Of course, given our track record with how America treats our allies in recent months, this shouldn’t shock a single Israeli.
Arab Spring = Israeli Winter. We got it now, Mr. President.
I do not understand how Americans can support Israel when America is expected to support the likes of the government of Israel that Netanyahyu formed.
Before we start to smell, we need to apply antiperspirant.
The problem is not really Obama’s uniquely. The same attitude is endemic to the leftists, not only in the US but around the world. Unfortunately, the leftists have now completely taken over the Dem party. Until that changes expect more of the same from all of them.
“the first blatantly anti-Israel American president in history.”
Umm, that would be Jimmy Earl Carter, but Obama is working hard to catch up. Most interestingly, his speech at Foggy Bottom this afternoon wasn’t received any better in the Arab capitals than it was in Israel. Think that it might be time for another Apology Tour?
I’m waiting to hear what Netanyahyu has as a counter proposal.
Let me get out my crystal ball. For some reason, Israel must always be allowed to expand into the West Bank. Any fury of Arabs experienced by this expansion is just unreasonable. Did I get this right?
LD,
Yes. You do recall, don’t you, that Israel lived peacefully outside of the West Bank and inside the borders established by the UN Partition Plan of 1947 for 20 years until they were invaded in an unprovoked attack by the combined forces of three Arab nations?
When Japan did that to us, we responded by destroying her military forces, leveling her major cities with firebombing and nuclear weapons, and writing a new constitution for Japan that outlawed offensive military forces. Perhaps Israel should have done the same thing in 1967.
HisRoc,
I believe that after we got done conquering Japan, they ended up with a nation of their own.
Now, compare our victory over Japan to what Netanyahu proposes for the West Bank.
Geez.. a lot of jews for Obama look at me know and hang their heads in shame.. I didn’t even have to say “told ya so”. Feels good to be a blacksheep among the tribe today.
LD,
The Palestinians have a nation of their own. They use it to launch rocket and suicide bomber attacks on Israel.
Hopefully Obama’s ignorant remarks don’t turn the “Arab Spring” into the “Arab Summer” free for all against Israel. With all of the future tragedies, death and suffering that will result from Obama’s comments by an emboldened enemy , I hope that his sorry performance at that news conference today comes back to bite him in the ass and he is held accountable.
I must say I pretty floored by this new foreign policy coming straight from the President’s lips. Our relationship with Israel has been strained for quite some time, but I’ve never heard a President set such conditions on a sovereign nation and supposed ally (sometimes a questionable ally, agreed, but aren’t all our allies questionable at times? Seems to me under Obama its the USA who been questionable lately.) Netanyahu and the King of Jordon needn’t waste their time coming over here next week.
[...] Obama Throws Israel Under the Bus (Again) - Bearing Drift: Virginia's Conservative Voice [...]
[...] Drift: Obama Throws Israel Under the Bus (Again) and Netanyahu Calls on Obama to Retract Statement, Honor U.S. [...]
President Obama’s position should be NO position.
Obama is a failure and I’m not even a j o o. Haha jk. U know 4 Obama not being Muslim he sure treat isreal like he’s Muslim.
@LittleDavid,
Also, during the occupation and after Japan was on its own, the Japanese were not insisting that the the United States be destroyed. By your logic, we have no right to retain Puerto Rico, Texas, and really all of the United States.
In truth, Obama’s statements on 1967 borders (adjusted to reflect certain realities, including Israel’s defense needs) forming the basis for an ultimate settlement has been the operative assumption of all parties since at least 2000, so this speech does not really reflect much of a sea change in U.S. policy.
Now, there is a fair debate to be had about whether there was a good reason for Obama to bring this particular policy out into the open at this particular point in time, and there is a fair argument to be had about whether Obama’s specific wording represents a subtle shift in U.S. policy (as expressed in 2004 by GW Bush, which recognizes Resolution 242, which references 1967 borders, as a basis for an ultimate settlement) or was merely sloppy and inexact (a different problem), but to suggest that Obama is “blatantly anti-Israel” and is “throwing Israel under the bus” severely overstates the meaning and effect of this part of the speech, and affirmatively misinterprets the tenor and content of Obama’s speech and U.S. policy as a whole.
Indeed, probably much more significant for Israel, given the current diplomatic maneuvering going on right now, was Obama’s strong opposition expressed in the speech to Palestinian efforts to have the U.N. General Assembly vote on a Palestinian state in September, and his insistance that before any deal could be reached (whatever borders might form the basis of any ultimate arrangement) there must be an acceptance of Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state by Palestinians — a condition unlikely to be acceptable to the current generation of Palestinians, since what it really means is that Palestinians must give up on their demand for the right to return.
In fact, seen in the context of the recent deal between Fatah and Hamas, and the potential upcoming vote in the U.S., Obama’s speech is more accurately seen as a clever preemptive strike blocking what could yet turn into a diplomatic catastrophe for Israel, without giving up much of anything in terms of current negotiating position or Israeli security.
How anyone with any knowledge of the situation can consider the totality of this policy to be anti-Israel is beyond me. Indeed, even Israel’s response to the speech recognizes this, although it does criticize the reference to the 1967 borders.
The critique of this speech from GOP and conservative quarters is more about the right wing in the U.S. attempting to drive a wedge between Obama and American Jews, and has little to do with actual U.S. policy toward Israel.
Aznew, those are leftist talking points.. Here, I posted some of my own on BV just for you bud.. http://www.bluevirginia.us/diary/3921/#15636
The problem goes back to 1949 when an artificial state was constructed by taking territory from others. I doubt in this forum mine is an especially popular position.
BTW, we Episcopals don’t have our own country either…
At this point, the extreme right wing, that is, the republican party, having suddenly lost its momentum due to continued gaffs, is desperately looking for some other raft to ride. Frankly, this issue is not it. Clearly, it is obvious that continued failure to come to an agreement means Isreal’s security continues to be in jeopardy. A new approach is required. Negotiating about the conditions to negotiate simply has kicked the can down the road for two more decades and delayed actually getting an agreement. No one who actually heard the speech and listened to it could say that the President is not a firm supporter of our ally, Isreal.
MB – Good point. This has all the earmarks of a manufactured controversy, and the GOP is clearly flailing about trying, desperately, to change the subject away from the GOP plan to eliminate Medicare.
The argument that this speech is any way demonstrates that Obama is anti-Israel is so weak even Bibi, in his response, could not muster up much anger, and instead resorted to asking Obama to promise a bunch of things he expressly promised in the speech already. The media, ever on the lookout for conflict to cover, suggests the meeting with Bibi will be tense — we’ll see, but I don’t think we’ll see much tension in public, though I suspect the usual characters will be looking for signs of it everywhere they can. Within 48 hours, needless to say, Fox will have to trot out their body language experts to find the tension when Obama and Netanyahu’s statements won’t do the trick.
That said, I believe Obama is appearing before AIPAC this weekend. That may be a tougher crowd for him.
No matter what how the press or our progressive friends spin it, Bibi (“it will never happen”) pretty much handed Obama a resounding rebuke of the idiotic boundary comments from the speech yesterday, which also didn’t happen to mention a thing about Libya and Syria. Obama’s expressions during Bibi’s comments indicated that he didn’t expect such a direct rejection in public of his decree for Israel walk back over 60 years and start over.
Interesting that Libya is mentioned at all. Today is apparently the 60-day anniversary of Obama’s attacks on Libya, for which he also apparently cited the War Powers Act as his authority to do so. After 60 days isn’t he supposed to get Congressional approval or something? Or are the majority Rs in Congress unwilling to go up against an imperial president who is showing the world how militarily tough we are?
I know, let’s get them all talking about something else; how about Israel, that always works.
You fell for it, didn’t you? Yes you did.
yeah.. Time to get the jews
Tim J – Wow, that was quick. So, Obama’s “expressions” gave away what he really thought, not what he and Netanyahu said. That predicition was almost too easy.
Interestingly, Jake Tapper at ABC wrote a story ont he meting between Netanyahu and Obama suggesting that it was tense, and that Bibi gave Obama a “history lesson.” I really don’t know what is more insulting, the idea that the President of the United States would sit still for a history lesson from a PM of Israel, or the idea that a PM of Israel, even an ideologue like Netanyahu, would be so disrespectful and impertinent to think they could lecture a U.S. President.
Could Tapper, a competent if somewhat conventional thinking reporter, really be that gullible?
Fortunately, Tapper soon updated his report with the following, that makes a lot more sense:
“A source close to Netanyahu says the prime minister wanted to say on record where Israel’s red lines are and that he offered the history lessons for the benefit of the world.
“The meeting was cordial, the source said, and went better than expected. President Obama offered more of an explanation of his speech to Netanyahu, and today he also heard clearer language on Hamas and how the onus is on the Palestinians to end terrorism.
“Of the three items that irked the prime minister in Obama’s speech, he chose, in public and private, to focus more on the two where there is more potential agreement — Hamas and the Palestinian refugee issue –- because the two just disagree on the 1967 lines controversy.”
Link:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2011/05/in-oval-office-bibi-offers-history-lessons-to-obama.html
Obama’s policies illustrate either that he is hostile toward Israel or grossly uneducated and naive about the history of that region. Either way, he was in dire need of a history lesson, and Netanyahu, who has written books on the subject (that I have read), had a right and responsibility to make Obama understand that his policies are putting Israel’s very survival in jeopardy.
But if you really want to talk about disrespectful behavior, take a look back at the last time Netanyahu came to the White House at Obama’s invitation: He was made to enter through the back, denied the photo op and press conference that are customary with visiting heads of state, and left waiting by himself for three hours while Obama went to have dinner with his family. Compare this utterly appalling behavior toward the head of state of one of America’s closest democratic allies to Obama’s bowing before the dictators of China and Saudi Arabia. Were you as critical of Obama then as you are now of Netanyahu for fighting for his country’s survival?
JH
Why stop at 1949? Why not look at 1922? Why not look at the disgraceful treatment accorded the Ottoman Empire which is the true owner of Palestine. Well wait a minute the Persian Empire had control before them. Maybe the Assyrians should be consulted.
One reason Obama can get away with this is that Muslims have infiltrated our government and organizations steadily over the last 20 years. Note that a Muslim is running for the House of Delegates in VA-87 in Loudon County. Tom Davis, a noted liberal Republican from Fairfax County is behind this move to send a Muslim to Richmond. If David Ramadan is a member of any mosque or Islamic social group such as CAIR, then he could have ties to terrorist groups such as Hamas that want to destroy Israel. Has anyone really vetted this man?
concur with Mike May (above). the Arab Spring was overall a net positive, so why are we trying to screw it up?!?!?!
I found many sites about obama throwing israel under the bus,because that was my very first thought after hearing his speech about pre 1967 borders???
The jews won that land through blood sweat and tears and obama suggests hey,just give that land back????I couldnt imagine being jewish and hearing him talk.
If I was the jewish president I would ask obama that the usa return to pre 1776 borders,after descimating the american indians?
I like this idea. I visited your website for the first time and simply been your supporter. Keep writing as I’m going to come to read it everyday!!
I predicted that Obama would turn his back on Israel the day he was elected. I was laughed at and ridiculed. I was called a racist and an Obama hater. Well the truth has finally come out again. How many mistakes does Obama get to make before his ardent supporters finally throw their hands up in the air and yell ‘OY VEY! Wake up and smell the coffee. Obama has two objectives. The overall destruction of our economy and the appeasement of the Muslim world. He is both anti-American and anti-Israeli.
Leave your response
The comments section is for meaningful discussion. Readers are reminded to post comments that are germane to the article and write in a common language that steers clear of personal attacks and/or vulgarities.
Please take a moment to review our comment policy.