For those of you who have never been to Israel, are not good at geography or want to know more about the region, the link below is a great piece regarding the reasons that Israel cannot accept President Obama's Retreat proposal. It is a short 5 minute video but it explains the reasons why the proposal is a non-starter from a military viewpoint.
Let me know what you think.
Here is the link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2hZ6SlSqq0&feature=player_embedded
Let me know what you think.
Here is the link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2hZ6SlSqq0&feature=player_embedded
Good grief, I thought we had this settled. President Obama did not propose a retreat to the 1967 borders. He called for 1967 borders augmented by mutually agreed land swaps necessary to -- among other things -- provide for Israel's security. One of the swaps that Israel would surely demand, which Netanyahu even specifically mentioned in his speech to Congress, would be Israeli military outposts along that eastern side. If the Palestinians would not agree to that, there would be no deal.
ReplyDeleteOn another topic, Rand Paul and Ron Wyden were making strong 4th Amendment objections today to the extension Patriot Act. I understand the need to stop terrorists, but that does not give the government a blank check to swoop up massive amounts of bank records, emails, wiretaps, and who knows what in the process.
Wyden is demanding that the Justice Dept. issue a written statement on their legal interpretation of the law. As a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, he as access to classified memos and other documents that reveal how loosely they choose to interpret the restrictions that the law places on them. There will be Senate hearing on his proposal. Have you been following this debate?
--David
David, You and I are not going to agree on the 1967 border issue, you see no problem and I see disaster. So I guess we will hae to agree to disagree!
ReplyDeleteI have not been following the debate as well as I should. There was a radio talk show host here in the Detroit area who used to say "I love my country but fear my government." I think that sums up my feelings. Everytime I hear a pol talk about what good things the government is doing for us, I fear what they are doing TO us!
Rand Paul was discussing the light bulb and toilet issue with an assistant secretary of the interior and he really laid her out. She did not know if she should curl up or die!! We are now mandated!@@ to use CFL bulbs in a couple year and incandescent bulbs will be verboten! These CFL bulbs have mercury and are a real mess if they break. They do use less energy but the light output is not as good as the old technology.
If CFLs work as well as toilets, we will pay more for less service and this is progress!
David, keep up the conversation, I do enjoy it.
I just want you to be accurate in your statement of what Obama proposes. It is not a "retreat to the 1967 borders," and should not be described that way. Whether you think 1967 borders with land swaps -- which is what he actually proposed -- is a workable idea is a separate question. On that question, my view is that no agreement is possible with the current governments in Israel and Palestine. The future is open.
ReplyDeleteYeah, Rand Paul and Ron Wyden are really upset about the Patriot Act and the powers it gives to the government. I was especially interested in Wyden's speech in the Senate. As a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, he has access to classified documents. He can't say publicly everything he knows, but, reading between the lines, my impression was that he believes the Justice Dept. is using a very loose interpretation of the restrictions the Patriot Act puts on government surveillance of American citizens. He wants their "secret" interpretation to be made public. That is the amendment that he wanted added. He lost.
--David