Total Pageviews

Monday, September 3, 2012

The Change Obama Had in Store for Israel

Nadene Goldfoot
Statement from Obama in 2010:  “Israel cannot be expected to negotiate with Palestinians who do not recognize its right to exist”.          …
     … his position  recorded in the White House on March 12, 2012.    Has he just changed his mind, or what?  Yet Hillary Clinton has continued to pound on Netanyahu to negotiate, even though the PA won't come to the table and if they did, want everything settled their way before they even sit down.  And of course, they won't recognize their right to exist.

This was a statement brought to my attention this morning.  It should matter to Jews as we have to vote in November.  Israel probably wasn't the prominent issue on many Jewish voters minds four years ago, but it's time to put it on the front burner and think about it along with social security and healthcare.  I keep thinking, we in the USA will survive, no matter what, but will Israel?  After 2,000 years of being treated like chopped liver and drek, shouldn't we give Israel a higher consideration this time?  If Israel doesn't survive, the USA will be next on the chopping block.

He was one of the few senators who didn't support the Kyl-Lieberman resolution calling the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization.  He was against overthrowing Saddaam Hussein when a state senator.  He wanted to meet with Ahmajinadad without preconditions.  and his idea of Iran was that it was a tiny nation, he told a Pendleton, Oregon crowd because they spent far less on their military than the Soviet Union.  He didn't want to deal with the Likud party in Israel, which is Netanyahu's party.  

Obama had chosen Zbigniew Brzezinski as his foreign policy adviser, who had been the same for Jimmy Carter from 1977 to 1981. We know now that Carter was most negative with the book he has come out with about Israel.   This Professor Brzezinski of noble-birth from Warsaw, Poland  may not have given the best advice to insure Israel's well-being.

In his speech to AIPAC on March 2, 2007, he mentioned that our job was to do more than lay out another road map.  Our job was to rebuild the road to real peace and lasting security throughout the region.  Then, what did he want when he was on TV with Netanyahu?  He suggested strongly that  Israel to go back to the 1967 lines and he didn't seem to understand why Netanyahu just about plotzed at that suggestion?  Oh yes, that certainly is a change in the road;  his road is completely blocked!  Being Obama's first finances came from George Soros doesn't help, either.  Old George has financed a group that undermines AIPAC who have allowed themselves to be bedazzled by his contributions.

He was a 2 year senator with very little experience and had done virtually nothing  in foreign policy.  He had surrounded himself with friends that were not favorable towards Israel which surely must have influenced his decisions. His co-chair in 2008 for the presidential campaign was General Merrill McPeak, who lives right here in Lake Oswego, just outside of Portland.  He was a man against AIPAC, which is Israel's only American Lobby group.  He has spoken against Israel's settlement policies in the Palestinian areas of Judea and Samaria and wants Israel's withdrawal of some towns. (Israel just  moved out 50 families or about 300+ people by their Supreme Court order because it was an unauthorized community which was a difficult step for Israel to take.) He said this back in 1976, so we know where he stands on such matters.  Anyone that seems to be supportive of Israel, this man has been against.  The Oregonian  carried an article about him on March 27, 2008.

Obama surrounded himself with advisers that have been a negative influence about Israel.  David Bonior, the biggest supporter of the anti-Israel Arab lobby in congress, Robert Mally, fierce critic of Israel, Samanatha Power who called for the suspension of aid to Israel but for Palestine and using US soldiers to invade Israel and force a peace agreement with the PA., Senator Chuck Hagel who refused to ask the EU to declare Hizbullah a terrorist organization and was one of 4 senators that refused to sign a senate letter in support of Israel, and Joseph Cirincione who wanted Israel to give up its nuclear material but refused to listen that Syria has been building up its nuclear enrichment capacity.

Ha'aretz Newspaper didn't see it coming when they graded the contenders back in 2008.  They thought he was pro-Israel.  So did a high % of Jewish voters as so many voted for their usual Democratic ticket.  

Back on March 17, 2010, Obama said, "“The Iranian government has been more concerned about preventing their people from exercising their democratic and human rights than trying to solve this problem diplomatically. That’s why we’re going to go after aggressive sanctions,” the president said.."  Yet, options are still on the table as of September 2012 and the atomic energy commission just announced that the sanctions haven't slowed Iran down a bit.  Obama hasn't visited with Netanyahu to calm his fears, either, most of us have noticed.

Obama has been known to call the Arab-Israeli conflict an "open wound" or "an open sore" on his foreign policy.  This comes from Jeff Goldberg of the Atlantic Monthly who interviewed McCain and Obama.  To Jeff this showed some sort thinking  on Obama's part that the parties were equally guilty  and all it would take is to get both sides together and that all the other problems in the Middle East comes from this "open sore," rhetoric that the neighbors of Israel like to throw around, and he has bought into it.  So Ahmadinejad calls Israel a "cancer" and now we have Obama going with "open sore".

The event that maddened me was when Netanyahu and his men were at the White House in March 2010 and didn't get invited for dinner but were left on their own while Obama had dinner with his family.  To top off this snub, Obama had left Netanyahu  with a list of 13 demands.    " For over an hour, Mr Netanyahu and his aides closeted themselves in the Roosevelt Room on the first floor of the White House to map out a response to the president's demands."  Is this how Obama treats a friend?

 He kept warning us by talking about bringing change, and this change seemed to be geared towards changing Israel.  He has talked a good talk but walks unfairly with Israel.  

Update 9/6/12,, With Democratic convention going on, they took out Jerusalem as the capital and then put it back in .What is "said" and what will be contractual "written" as policy is to be seen.  So far, it has not been the American policy to accept Jerusalem as Israel's capital.  

Oregonian newspaper  9/3/12 page A4 Israeli settlers exit unauthorized site


1 comment:

Michelle said...

While I am in disagreement with how the Obama administration and the Democratic Party handled the Yerushalayim Capital issue, I am unwilling to hand the USA over to the GOP.

Single issue voters are far too narrowly focused to see a bigger picture. I will NOT allow Women in the USA to become breeders as they are in the Haredi, and Arab world.

The USA cannot return to the middle ages because single issue American voters are afraid Obama and the Democratic Party are a little squishy about Israel. At the same time Obama CONTINUES to SUPPORT Israel in every way.