| Submit your comments on this article |
| Israel-Palestine-Jordan |
| The One Explains "1967 Borders" |
| 2011-05-23 |
 "By definition, it means that the parties themselves - Israelis and Palestinians - will negotiate a border that is different than the one that existed on June 4, 1967. That's what mutually agreed upon swaps means," Obama said. "It allows the parties themselves to account for the changes that have taken place over the last forty-four years. ... including the new demographic realities on the ground and the needs of both sides," he said. |
| Posted by:Bobby |
| #11 What he really meant was that he was in a Borders Books one time and ate a sandwich with arugula. |
| Posted by: CincinnatusChili 2011-05-23 20:20 |
| #10 So the actual result for Israel could be worse than the 1967 borders? Yes. A contiguous 'Palestine' realistically implies a bisected Israel. Israel would be worse off strategically. |
| Posted by: Spike Glaiter6431 2011-05-23 17:47 |
| #9 After the next Arab-Israeli war, the borders of Israel will be all the land yet livable after Israel nukes the he$$ out of the rest of the Muddled East. Hezbollocks rockets, Syrian tanks, and Egyptian populations will require Israel to use their nukes early and often, or be swept away. The Israelis do NOT have a death wish. The Arabs - it's questionable. The Palestinians - it's certain. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2011-05-23 13:44 |
| #8 "Nearly two weeks ago, Fatah, the U.S.-backed Palestinian National Liberation Movement, signed an agreement to form a unity government with Hamas, a U.S.-listed foreign terror organization. ... Hamas's own foreign minister has stated that Hamas 'believe[s] that negotiations with the Israeli enemy are in vain.' The Hamas Charter calls for Islam to 'abolish' Israel and for Muslims to 'fight the Jews and kill them.' It further proclaims, 'There is no solution to the Palestinian problem except jihad.' ... Where would U.S. dollars go in this new unity government? Hamas isn't hiding their intentions for these funds. In touting the new unity government, Hamas foreign minister Mahmoud al-Zahhar announced, 'We believe in armed struggle, in addition to responsible governing, as well as making the government's resources available to the resistance,' i.e. terrorism. ... Israel has already cut off tax funds that it routinely collects for the Palestinian Authority. The United States should follow this example, suspend all funds to the Palestinians until Fatah withdraws from the agreement, and make it clear that if the agreement is honored, there will be no more U.S. dollars for the Palestinian Authority. The fact that we even have to debate this question is absurd." --Jordan Sekulow, Director of policy and international operation for American Center for Law and Justice |
| Posted by: Lumpy Elmoluck5091 2011-05-23 12:43 |
| #7 "It allows the parties themselves to account for the changes that have taken place over the last forty-four years. ... including the new demographic realities on the ground and the needs of both sides," he said. According to that logic we should cede California to Mexico...oh, wait, that's exactly what we're doing. |
| Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305 2011-05-23 11:44 |
| #6 "It allows the parties themselves to account for the changes that have taken place over the last forty-four years. ... including the new demographic realities on the ground and the needs of both sides," How about including the geostrategic realities on the ground, such as the Arabs losing four wars? The Paleos striking out twice on the intifadas? Usually the victor of repeated wars gets to dictate the terms of peace. Golly gee, can't imagine why Obama wouldn't allow precedent to handle this one. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2011-05-23 11:33 |
| #5 How does that foot taste, Bambi? How about being publicly rejected by Israel in front of the press? Gene and 746 are right. Teh 0ne just doesn't get it. |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2011-05-23 10:11 |
| #4 Zero really doesnt get it |
| Posted by: 746 2011-05-23 10:04 |
| #3 The Arabs/Palestinians lost at least three major wars against Israel. Their position to negotiate for territories is about that of Saddam in his spider hole. |
| Posted by: European Conservative 2011-05-23 09:46 |
| #2 The Israeli borders will only be acceptable to the paleos (and the rest of the non-Israeli world) when the eastern border of Israel is defined as the low tide level of the eastern Mediterranean Sea. And even that may not be acceptable forever. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2011-05-23 08:58 |
| #1 So the actual result for Israel could be worse than the 1967 borders? |
| Posted by: Matt 2011-05-23 08:29 |