Yeah, well, I may not be the most articulate poster here having English as a 3rd language so pardon me that sophisticated sensibilities of yours met an extra coarse blabberings of mine this morning.
Sometimes to get a point even in a poorly written piece intelligence plays a crucial role. It is a tool that stitches said piece together. Not everyone has it. When lack of intelligence is combined with malice a very special person is being exposed to us.
So, thank you for your insignificant input.
Do you really not know what changed in the UN between 1948 and today? Really? [bauhaus] Elanor Roosevelt’s Dead…[/bauhaus]
Did it ever occur to you that Obama actually wants to do what’s best for Israel, (which also happens to be what’s best for the US) and bring about a negotiated peace with land swaps, and that this will be more difficult if the UN recognizes Palestine?
I am SO bookmarking this to resurrect as a zombie…
To be fair, newcomer is:
-a Truther who thinks that Israel was somehow connected to 9/11,
-a willfully ignorant anti-Israel fanatic
-probably mildly mentally retarded
But I don’t recall him being particularly right-wingy.
I truly hope that statements like this are less baffling before you translate them from whatever language your brain operates in.
[quote=“saoirse, post:22, topic:597068”]
(..) what’s best for Israel, (which also happens to be what’s best for the US) How’s that even remotely possible? How’s building illegal settlements “best for US”? It’s “best” compared to what?
Dont you get tired repeating that? How would you even know?
Well, if you’re actually posting through babelfish that explains a lot.
But really, I was just referring as much to your obsession with the subject as to your simultaneously pretentious and incoherent writing style.
How can you separate a wider Arab reaction, and its implications for the US, from evaluating whether recognising Palestinian statehood is a good idea or not? Are you seriously saying that American foreign policy makes no reference to the wider context within which events are happening?
The great US of A has to tell foreign PM to ask US representatives to hold their horses 
How do you say “banana republic” in English?
Er… “banana republic”.
That said, I’m reminded of the line from The Princess Bride.
Why do you keep using this word? Do not think it means what you think it means.
I’m always amazed at how people find the least relevant item (in this case, quite a lame attempt at self-referential joke) in my posts to comment on.
How about you opine on Mrs. Clinton having to ask Netanyahu to tell US Congressmen not to oppose White House? Isn’t that absurd or what, huh?
Who knows - maybe that’s how it should be only some of us find out a bit later.
So, if you had to round to the nearest 10, how many times were you dropped on your head as an infant?
So you are saying that there is a threat, and one the US ought to take seriously?
As to your questions - yes, I can very easily seperate the inherent merits of a proposal to the people involved, from a threat if the proposal isn’t carried through to the liking of the person making the threat. Can’t you?
Take this statehood issue as an example. I think a UN declaration is a bad idea from everyone’s perspective, purely on a pro and con reading.
Undertaking something that is a bad idea purely because otherwise people will be pissed at you is a bad idea. For one, it overlooks the fact that people are gonna be pissed at you, and blame you, if the bad idea turns out to have been a bad idea.
This is what I’d ask Obama…
Imagine for a second, a Civil Rights Movement years and POTUS at that time saying “There is no shortcut to Civil Rights. African-Americans must find accommodation with their white oppressors in southern States.”
Imagine if integration would be possible in southern States without Federal Government involvement and decisive action?
Imagine if someone at that time asked “Do African-Americans deserve rights?” Or, more pointedly, “How can we give Civil Rights to African-Americans who might also have sympathy for militaristic groups such as Black Panthers?”
I wonder what MLK would say about this…
Umm… they did. MLK thought they were wrong, and changed their minds. Thing is, no one was launching rockets into Birmingham. Also, Dr. King approached desegregation having already acknowledged Alabama’s right to exist. Finally, as the solution to that problem is integration, I fail to see how it applies to creating a viable Palestinian state.
Point of my theoretical blabbering in a post earlier was that this is no longer self-evident truth. There are no longer geopolitical reasons to support Israel.
There was not before Arab Spring.
Now, even less.
[/QUOTE]
President Obama is still dancing around the fact that his ME policy is dictated to him from Tel Aviv & Jerusalem. It’d be nice if he just said so outright, but that is something he is not permitted.
Similarly, it’d decades since there was any rational basis for the US taking Israel’s side. Now it’s largely doggedness. For instance we often have the discussion: How would the USA be impacted if Israel simply slid into the sea without a whisper? It’s not part of the permitted mythology for this question to be rationally discussed. This is because the answer is that two things would occur. The US would thrive; and it would prosper.
So then you believe that US foreign policy is controlled by this Jewish cabal located in “Tel Aviv and Jerusalem”?
I don’t think that’s Capitaine’s point at all. On the contrary: the Arab spring changed the picture, possibly made the new Arab states more likely to accept Israel. But Washington OTOH is still playing by the old book, the one where Arab states were run by self-appointed, Israel hating tyrants who are going to use the UN to use the UN to bully Israel.
It’s a brave new world out there. Or possibly, not. But you gotta try, unless you’re adamant on making the new world into the old one.
Is Egypt one of these “new Arab states”? Having an angry crowd of protesters sacking the Israeli embassy as the staff flee the country is an interesting way to show “acceptance”. :dubious:
Indeed, relations between Egypt and Israel are worse than they have ever been since the peace accord.
Crowds are always and have always been retarded. I bet I could get an American crowd to sack an Israeli embassy tomorrow if I set my heart on it. It’s wholly unfair to judge a disorganized, chaotic state by mob reactions. Especially considering they didn’t have half a point in the matter - Israel did cross into sovereign land. They might have had their reasons, and it might have been justified or whatever - I don’t want to hear any of that.
All I know is, if Belgian troops had crossed over into France and shot up some French troops just because a French citizen crossed into Israel, blew shit up and came back, I… well, I wouldn’t give a shit, admittedly. But I know some French would ! Sovereignty is supposed to mean something.