Obama endorses Netanyahu as man of peace

[Karmadillo]

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/jul2010/isra-j08.shtml

By Chris Marsden
8 July 2010

President Barack Obama on Tuesday praised Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as a man who “wants peace” and is “willing to take risks for peace.”

He did so following a White House meeting five weeks after the May 31 raid on the Mavi Marmara Gaza aid convoy, in which Israeli forces murdered eight Turkish activists and a dual Turkish-US national. The White House meeting was also on the eve of another round of Israeli settlement expansion on the West Bank.

On the day of the meeting, a report by the human rights group B’Tselem said that Jewish settlements with 300,000 people now control more than 42 percent of all land in the West Bank, including 21 percent of all privately owned Palestinian land.

<edit>

Obama went to extraordinary lengths in his efforts to rehabilitate Netanyahu and Israel in the face of popular anger internationally over its blockade of the Gaza Strip and the suffering this inflicts on the Palestinians. He said nothing about the continued construction of Jewish settlements in East Jerusalem and did not urge an extension to the partial freeze.

<edit>

The Israeli press noted in particular the significance of Obama’s defense of Israel’s nuclear deterrent. Obama rejected any singling out of Israel over its undeclared nuclear program as a threat to the 2012 Middle East regional nuclear conference.

more...

[HEyHEY]

1. And awwwayyy we go!

[tblue]

2. Okay then!

I think he had to say it, but still.

[Dank Nugs]

3. I can't stop laughing. Calling Netanyahu a man of peace is like saying Hitler was a fluffy bunny

[Hardrada]

4. Is this some sick attempt at satire?

[Rex]

5. Willing to take risks? Is that what we are calling it?

Okay...fine...whatever. Thanks.

[Ignis]

28. Perhaps he meant to say "a risk to the peace process?"

[ixion]

6. Yeah. Right.

:eyes:

[Carolina]

7. Excuse me while I go

:puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke:

[leveymg]

8. This is not the man whom I helped elect.

:banghead:

[mod mom]

20. Were we fooled or is the position of presidency a figurehead that receives

orders from those who pull the strings? I'm not being facetious, I really wonder. I really thought his roots working within a poor community would shape him to work for the people instead of the powerful.

[leveymg]

23. I think deception and obfuscation is an inherent part of the job.

The only question is, to whom is is lying about this? Was he lying before, of is he lying now about Netanyahu?

[mod mom]

24. Doesn't matter if he's lying to Netanyahu, because he got what he wanted...

approval for his rogue actions.

[marmar]

9. Yep. And Glenn Beck is a man of sanity.

nt

[Vinca]

10. Well, call me Twiggy.

[Altoid_Cyclist]

11. As I said ealier this week, we are now living in "Bizarro World".

This also just in to the news desk; Iraq and Afghanistan stabilized and made secure for all citizens by US and NATO occupation. I made that one up, but it's what we've heard would happen for the last 9 years.

[Altoid_Cyclist]

12. Oops! Dupe

[Ichingcarpenter]

13. He means a man who wants a piece of the West Bank,

a piece of the Golan Heights and other pieces that end the chance for peace.

[Ignis]

27. +1

[mmonk]

14. .

:spray:

Obama looking for another "peace prize"?

[Tailormyst]

15. Stick a fork in me....I am done.

Anyone who thinks there is any truth, integrity or ethics in DC has been successfully punked.

[peekaloo]

16. Kinda like that Bob Dylan song?

wow.

[howaboutme]

17. I wouldn't call Netanyahu a man of peace

but then I'm not a politician, and I put a priority on honesty, and I am not beholden to anyone.

Politicians in our current accepted system of campaign bribery are beholden (and I use "beholden" as a courtesy).

Netanyahu's historic record speaks for itself. Anyone who claims black is white and the sun sets in the east usually loses overall credibility. Politicians who make honesty their number one mission are a rare commodity.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

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

[ceile]

19. Riiiiiight

:eyes:

[Nuclear Unicorn]

21. My guess:

The president has a choice: Iran or Israel. They are mutually exclusive because they are on a collision course over nuclear weapons. Whatever the president may want is immaterial because Iran and Israel cannot reconcile when they cannot speak to each other.

Iran knows its biggest threat is from Israel seeking to knock out its reactors and centrifuges. If Iran does open its facilities to inspectors the impetus for Israel to attack them withers on the vine but if it believes Israel will be prevented from attacking it has no reason to open these facilities.

But the president probably understands that if Israel believes itself subject to a nuclear attack or even nuclear blackmail it has nothing to lose. Whatever the president has to say will fall on deaf ears. Isolating Israel won't reduce the chance of war with Iran, it would increase it.

So the president calls Netanyahu "a man of peace." That puts the ball back in Iran's court as to whether they want to be seen on the world stage as antagonizing "a man of peace."

UPSIDE: If Iran blinks the "man of peace" becomes a tool to go back to Israel and say, "I saved you from a war. You owe me. Let's talk about things like West Bank settlements and the Gaza blockade. How do you think a 'man of peace' should approach these issues?"

DOWNSIDE: If Iran refuses to lay to rest concerns over it nuclear program or is found to be building a bomb Israel is green-lighted to attack and the most the president can do is sit on the sidelines but the last thing he wants to do is be seen hedging in favor of the mullahs who steal elections and gun-down their own people at the expense of a regional ally that still polls high with Americans and certainly higher than Iran.

It's one helluva gamble and I don't envy him for having to make it but any other choice with Iran upsetting the entire region, including their Arab neighbors. Whatever folks here may think of Israel the remainder of the Persian Gulf states aren't happy at the thought of a nuclear Iran either. The president has to take their concerns int account as well.

[Moochy]

22. Lies

[spanone]

25. what did you think he would say? or any president for that matter?

[dionysus]

26. why, he's supposed to do something monumentally stupid, like call the guy a murderous bastard!

even though we all know he's a bastard, anyone would the tiniest shred of common sense wouldn-- oh wait, this is DU we're talking about. nevermind....

[howaboutme]

29. But to be fair Obama had some incentive

to treat Netanyahu kindly and with kid gloves. It has been some time since a US President directly clashed with Israel. The last was JFK and coincidentally it was regarding their nuclear arms program. There is credible evidence about Kennedy's clash with the Israelis, and some of it comes from the individual who exposed their nuclear program http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mordechai_Vanunu

[Raineyb]

30. What incentive again?

Netanyahu is a liar and a fucking racist. As to Israel's nuclear program, everybody knows that Israel has nuclear weapons and has had them for years. That we pretend not to know is utterly ridiculous.

The Palestinians would do well NOT to treat us as an honest broker. There is nothing honest about the brokering our country does in there. Not a damn thing.

[SOS]

31. Bush: Sharon A 'Man Of Peace'

Bush: Sharon A 'Man Of Peace'

Washington Post
Friday, April 19, 2002
"President Bush strongly endorsed Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon as a "man of peace" yesterday."

:boring:

[G_j]

32. I knew this sounded familiar

I remember that

[Jack Rabbit]

33. Diplomacy makes liars of us all

I hope this kind of flattery gets us somewhere.

[City Lights]

34. Oh brother.

:eyes:

Layin' in on a bit thick, eh, Mr. President?

[Radical Activist]

35. It reminds me of Obama's peace prize.

More of an admonition than a recognition.