Shots Across the Bow

A Reality Based Blog

 
Monday, May 23, 2011

The Obama Middle East Piece Plan: No, that’s Not a Misspelling.

Okay, so here is what Obama said in 2008 to AIPAC when he was running for President:
Let me be clear. Israel's security is sacrosanct. It is non-negotiable. The Palestinians need a state that is contiguous and cohesive, and that allows them to prosper — but any agreement with the Palestinian people must preserve Israel's identity as a Jewish state, with secure, recognized and defensible borders. Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided.

Two days later, he backed down from the statement that Jerusalem must remain undivided, claiming it was "poor phrasing." However, he said nothing about the claim for a "contiguous" Palestinian state.

Then last Thursday, he gave a speech at the State Department and said:
The United States believes that negotiations should result in two states, with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan, and Egypt, and permanent Israeli borders with Palestine. The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states. The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves, and reach their potential, in a sovereign and contiguous state.

Again, he supported the idea of a contiguous Palestinian State with borders to Jordan and Egypt, one based on the 1967 lines. No mention was made of Jerusalem, which, prior to 1967, was a divided city.

Then, just a couple of days ago, facing heat for what appeared to be either a complete betrayal of Israel or a demonstration of immense ignorance about the issues at stake, he said this at AIPAC:

Since questions have been raised, let me repeat what I actually said on Thursday — not what I was reported to have said.

I said that the United States believes that negotiations should result in two states, with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan, and Egypt, and permanent Israeli borders with Palestine. The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps — (applause) — so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states. The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves, and reach their potential, in a sovereign and contiguous state.


Let's see: Two states - check.
Palestinian borders to include Egypt and Jordan- check.
Contiguous Palestinian state- check.
based on 1967 pre war boundaries- check.

Apparently, he has confirmed that he did say what he was reported to say, which makes his characterization of the reportage a bald faced lie.

In any event, let's take his last word on the subject, the AIPAC speech and look at a map of Israel.
image

The light color represents Israel's borders prior to the 6 Days War. The dark area shows the lands that belonged to Jordan and Eqypt until they lost them in the 6 Days War after attacking Israel. It's also interesting to know that the Golan Heights and the West Bank were not part of Transjordan, the predecessor to the Kingdom of Jordan, but were annexed during the war in 1948.

Note carefully the scale on the map. Most of Israel is less than 50 miles wide.

Now then, let's evaluate President Obama's proposals while looking at the map.

First, he wants to use the pre-war boundaries as a starting point. That would split Jerusalem, and leave Israel trying to maintain access to the Mediterranean sea with only a 8-9 mile strip of territory. One quick push and the nation would be cut in two, and cut off from its major ports. Clearly, this would not be considered a defensible border. Next, he wants a Palestinian state that is contiguous, and that has borders with Jordan and Egypt. The only way for that to happen is if Israel is cut into two pieces, or gives up most of the Southern half of the nation, along with their only port to the Red Sea.

To fulfill his agenda, Israel would have to give up access to the Red Sea, a significant amount of territory, and accept borders that would be nearly impossible to defend.

But wait! What about the land swaps? Obama says that's the key to understanding his proposals. Israel and Palestine can swap land to create more defensible borders. Well, let me ask you a question. Look at the light colored area on the map. The Palestinian Arabs would be gaining almost a third of the present area of Israel without firing a shot, with a guarantee of more land in Southern Israel to make contiguous borders with Egypt and Jordan. They would also be getting half of Jerusalem back under their control.

What would they want to swap? They already get everything they want, except of course, for the destruction of Israel. They might have to wait a few months for that.

The Israeli's would have to be fools to accept Obama's proposals, and he's a fool for making them.

Or a liar. Take your pick.

Posted by Rich
WarIsrael • (0) CommentsPermalink


Saturday, May 21, 2011

Martin Short Sings to Osama

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uyhc_BOHzW8&feature=player_embedded

Posted by Rich
War • (0) CommentsPermalink


Monday, April 25, 2011

The Awesome Military Might of NATO

The AP reports that NATO strikes badly damaged the Qaddafi compound in Libya.

Hooray NATO!

The headline reads "Qaddafi Compound Nearly Crumbled in NATO Attack"

Then it turns out that they didn't hit anything vital, just a library and a ceremonial meeting hall, equipped, we are told breathlessly, with sofas and chandeliers!

Oh, the horrors of war!

The AP goes on to give a lurid description of the damaged facility:
The main door was blown open, shards of glass were scattered across the ground and picture frames were knocked down.

Picture frames were knocked down! How uncivilized! Are there no bounds to war anymore? When picture frames, sofas, and chandeliers aren't safe in wartime, then who is?

In essense, what the AP is saying is that NATO packs all the punch of a three year old toddler who missed his nap.

Pardon me for a moment. I have to lie down and collect myself.




Posted by Rich
WarLibya • (0) CommentsPermalink


Monday, April 04, 2011

I’m a Betting Man

What's the over/under for the date US ground troops enter Libya? Given that the air campaign is yielding less than successful results, and that Obama has wagered his political capital pretty heavily on bringing Khaddafi down, I don't think he can just walk away, leaving Khaddafi still in power. His only choice will be to escalate and NATO is already showing that they can't cut the mustard even with just an air war.

I'm betting on June 27th.

Posted by Rich
WarLibya • (0) CommentsPermalink


Page 1 of 1 pages

Quote

Bible Verse of the Day

Monthly Archives