Is Pres. Obama reaching out to Muslims at the expense of America’s relationship with Israel?

[democracy1st]

FROM CNN’s Jack Cafferty:

In reaching out to the world’s one and a half billion Muslims with today’s historic speech, it’s unclear if President Obama is also pushing away America’s long-time ally Israel.

Speaking in Cairo — the president recognized the U.S.’s unbreakable bond with the Jewish state and the horror of the Holocaust, but also talked about the suffering of the Palestinian people. He described their situation as intolerable and stressed the need for a two-state solution.

President Obama called on Palestinians to abandon violence — pointing to America’s own civil rights history and saying it was a “peaceful and determined insistence” that brought about equal rights.

And, he once again called on Israel to stop building settlements; and to allow Palestinians to live and work and develop their society. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has already rejected President Obama’s call for a settlement freeze.

But experts suggest that this demand from Mr. Obama will make Arab leaders listen. They say although the U.S. has been opposed to Israeli settlements for decades, past American presidents have allowed Israel to keep building them. And some believe that if “no” really means “no” this time around, it may be easier to form a regional coalition against Iran.

Speaking of Iran — Mr. Obama repeated his belief today that the Islamic Republic has the right to develop nuclear power for peaceful purposes — another statement that is probably not sitting too well with the Israelis.

Finally, for the first time in a long time, a visit to the Middle East by a sitting U.S. president did not include a stop in Israel.

Here’s my question to you: Is Pres. Obama reaching out to Muslims at the expense of America’s relationship with Israel?


But first read what CNN viewers say

http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2009/06/04/obama-reaching-out-to-muslims-at-expense-of-u-s-israel-relationship/

[Douglas Carpenter]

1. If the settlements are not removed. If President Obama does not establish trust with the Arab

and Islamic world...

There will be no possibility whatsoever for a viable Palestinian state.

There will be no possibility whatsoever for a two-state solution.

There will be no possibility whatsoever for peace for Israelis or Palestinians or anyone else in the region.


P.S. I do indeed rejoice in reading the responses on the McCafferty File.
The tide has turned and there is no question that there is now a progressive consensus on the Israel/Palestine conflict.

[democracy1st]

2. true

[Chulanowa]

3. Is it important?

During the cold war, Israel was important in the region - being effectively a West European nation in a region dominated by pro-soviet governments. Israel was our "toehold" in the region. But now the Cold War is over, and our tight association with Israel is only hurting our national and international level. What exactly does this conjoined twin relationship do to benefit the American people? To be really honest, not a whole hell of a lot. It's time to loosen some of the ties that bind, and forge some new ones with other actors in the region.

[PCIntern]

5. Oh really?

You obviously know nothing about the Intelligence operations of the ME, the technology exchange which is vital to both countries, and the brain trust which is Israel, including, but certainly not limited to, agricultural research and medical innovations. And the list goes on and on.

To say Israel is of little importance is just absurd.

[Chulanowa]

6. Not quite how I meant it, but it does seem to have come out that way

But I reiterate my question. Does it matter if our ties with Israel loosen? especially if that loosening translates into strengthening ties with several other local players? My point was, Israel was very important to the US in the Cold War because after the Shah got his fat ass chased out of Iran, they were our sole gateway into the middle east. Now, however, Israel is of considerably less strategic importance, simply because the Us has more options in the region. I would suspect that this fact is behind a lot of the caterwauling and drum-pounding Israeli politicians have been doing since Obama took office - They're afraid of becoming part of a competitive market.

[Honeycombe8]

39. Israel was always more than a "strategic" player.

Israel was, and is, one of America's closest allies. Same thing with Great Britain (GB is more so, of course, since it "birthed" us. Well, some of us.) Also, many of our citizens are related to people in Israel, and a number of our citizens live as expatriots in Israel.

We come to the aid of Israel not just because it is in our interest, but to help an ally. And the reverse would be true, I'm sure. Same thing with Great Britain.

But that doesn't mean we don't speak the truth to our allies. We should.

Disclaimer: I am not Jewish, so I have no horse in the race.

[frogcycle]

7. oh bullshit

nobody is saying sever all ties with Israel and never speak to them again

[Hippo_Tron]

35. Pre 9/11 that was the case

Post 9/11, Israel has again become of crucial strategic importance to the US.

[TomClash]

4. Let's hope so

It's high time the US took a more progressive position and stopped tacitly supporting the incremental Israeli land grab.

[frogcycle]

8. at the expense of the blind allegiance part - yes

and high time.

the festering sore that is US/Mideast relations has gone on long enough.

But is it at Israel's long-term expense? NO! An even-handed approach that results in some sort of truce and improves Israel's security is hardly at their expense.

No matter how many nukes they accumulate, they can't turn the entire region to glass and survive themselves. Finding a damned way to turn swords into plowshares, even with people you hate, is the only viable long-term plan.

[iconocrastic]

27. haha - why not ask the Muslims to put down their weapons?

"the festering sore that is US/Mideast relations has gone on long enough. "

And what's the solution? Give the crazies whatever they want?

To not face the the crazies out of fear, and because they won't listen to reason, and then put pressure on our friend Israel, the only democracy in the middle east, because they're the only ones who will listen to reason, is cowardice and a sellout.

"Finding a damned way to turn swords into plowshares, even with people you hate, is the only viable long-term plan."

hahaha - easy to say, in a convoluted way, but totally meaningless, actually a denial of the truth, an easy lie.

[Binka]

40. haha let's ask Israel to give back the aid the US gives them to buy their weapons

Hahaha you are a clown. Get your red nose and big shoes out the next time you post.

[karynnj]

9. No - Obama has taken pains to speak of his enduring support for Israel

Watch Biden's speech at AIPAC. Biden was Obama's representative there. Biden spent consider time recounting that support - and proposing the same things that Obama spoke of yesterday. Biden's speech followed Kerry's speech which had the same mix of a gut level declaration of support for Israel and a call for the same solution.

These two speeches were hailed by Brit Tzdekah v Shalom, a group that reflects the opinion of more American Jews than AIPAC - and which has been growing. When I say these men claimed to support Israel, I mean they support the country, not the policies of the current government. It amazes me that AIPAC and the right want the litmus test for supporting Israel to be deferring to their government on the correct actions in the middle east. This would be like agreeing with the right that John Kerry and other Democrats by opposing Bush did not support America. We need to reject that equivalence.

It is extremely important that we do so. I assume that things will not go smoothly in solving the Israeli/Palestinian problem. This is, of course, a situation where both sides have been told by those with the most extreme views that time is on their side and they will end up with everything. For those extremists, any settlement that divides who gets what is a loss. It is also complicated because elements of the far left have been blatantly antisemitic in the past. The balance captured so well in those AIPAC speeches needs to used to counter the idea that President Obama is siding with the Palestinians - when, in fact, he is trying to reach out to the better angels on both sides.

Domestically, I assume the right will work as hard as they can to claim Obama is against Israel and for the Muslims - even though the Republican Jewish organization complained that he was "too balanced". Ironically, the right may be more successful pushing this idea with Christians than with Jews.

[Karenina]

10. "too balanced"

[scheming daemons]

11. I certainly hope so... our relationship with Israel has been destructive for us AND the world

[ecstatic]

12. Telling the truth shouldn't destroy America's relationship with Israel.

If it does, then it wasn't really much of a relationship to begin with.

If Israel can't handle the truth, then oh well...

[Cha]

14. Precisely~ I really hate these

disingenuous poll questions from cnn, msnbc, etc.

[olegramps]

13. He has it backward, It is at the expense of the American taxpayer.

They are high maintenance and have been bleeding us dry for far too long. They are driven by religious nonsense that Palestine was given to them by God. It was "given" to them after they slaughtered all of the original inhabitants, including women and children, in wars ordained by their God. The only ones they didn't slaughter were virgins who they forced into marriages. Give me a break. Soloman had 300 wifes and 700 concubines. Give me that old time religion.

[leftynyc]

15. It was given to them by the UN

The rest of your post is too ridiculous to comment on.

[Occam Bandage]

18. I don't think we can really accept the Biblical account as true. nt

[WyLoochka]

16. The "relationship" with Israel

does not have much value at this point. Now - and for the past couple of decades or so - it has been a destructive relationship. Destructive to our interests, most of the rest of the world's interests as well as the Israelis interests.

So there is no "expense" involved with re-setting the relationship on a different, more realistic, footing that has peace and prosperity for all in the area as a goal.

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Posteritatis]

17. I got the impression he didn't think it had to be a zero-sum problem (nt)

[cooolandrew]

19. It's in the mutual intrest of both it just takes time to breakdown the hardened feelings but >

President Obama sure will work on it.

[grantcart]

20. No, boy that was easy

[grillo7]

21. Friends Don't Let Friends Drive Drunk

I'm really tired of the idea that by being critical of a nation, we are being less friendly or helpful. This situation with Israel is similar to the French opposition to the Iraq war, to which we responded in the most infantile way possible...freedom fries anyone?

Supporting the two state solution and opposing more settlements is in Israel's best interest just as much as it is for the rest of the world.

[zulchzulu]

22. It's a loaded bullshit question

"Reaching out to Muslims" is not at anyone else's expense... unless it's an unbalanced equation in the first place.

If Israel is pissed that the Muslim/Arab World has a right to exist and have a reasoned, mature dialogue, then perhaps the problem is obvious.

Of course, there are not just the Likudists in Israel. There are many other moderate, reasonable groups within Israel that want to turn the page on the Palestinian conflict. They want peace. Peace happens when mutual respect is the guiding force.

[vaberella]

32. +1000. Finally, someone said what I was thinking. n/t

[Kajsa]

23. No, he's not.

Recognizing Palestine's right to exist, just as Israel has the same right,
shouldn't threaten any relationship with Israel.

Not only does Pres. Obama recognize Palestine, he uses the NAME
Palestine, something I have not heard a POTUS do, ever.

There are two sides to the situation/conflict between Israel and Palestine.
One should not dominate over the other.

[ieoeja]

24. Obama is screwing up real bad if he pushes Israel to side with Al Qaeda against us!

[democracy1st]

25. he's not doing that...he would never attempt to harm the relationship only thing

Isreal has to desire peace in the region and the settlements say otherwise

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

26. I think that should be CNN's next question. Or we can change Al Qaeda for North Korea.

:rofl:

[AtomicKitten]

29. Not at all, in fact he's ensuring their safety and wellbeing

by persuading Muslim countries to work for peace in the region instead of stoking the fires of animosity.

[Beacool]

30. Does the administration really believe this?

"Speaking of Iran — Mr. Obama repeated his belief today that the Islamic Republic has the right to develop nuclear power for peaceful purposes — another statement that is probably not sitting too well with the Israelis."

Iran wants to develop nuclear power for far more than peaceful purposes. Let's not pretend otherwise. The issue is how to contain Iran and how to prevent Israel from attacking Iran if they think that Iran is close to having nuclear weapons. Tough job....

:-(

[vaberella]

34. Actually we have no room to assume what you suggest.

You sound as like Bush when he said of course Saddam Hussein HAD to have WMDs and we've been proven wrong. So without any evidence stating otherwise we have to trust that the sovereign nation that has not attacked and over taken it's smaller populated nations in decades if not centuries, it's suddenly feeling like it wants to know.

At this point the question is how to contain Israel who has blatantly put out that it wants to attack Iran and definitely push Iran away from developing (if that is it's plan) nuclear weapons and a probable arms race (which doesn't seem to be the case, as of yet).

[HOLOS]

31. Balance

[CreekDog]

33. The status quo is really at the expense of Israel

Peace is the best thing for our relationship with Israel and for Israel's own security.

[jberryhill]

36. Wow - good one /nt

[uponit7771]

37. Hopefully, the settlements are illegal and demeaning

[kwenu]

38. No. He supports Israel's right to exist but it's time to be an honest broker on the world stage.