NETANYAHU has almost certainly cost Obama and the Democratic Party, a second term in office.
November 2, 2009,
President Obama's decision to withdraw his demand for the cessation of illegal settlement on the West Bank, in the face of the intransigence of Israel's Benyamin Netanyahu, has left him exposed, vulnerable and weak - and has almost certainly cost him, and the Democratic Party, a second term in office.
It has also scuppered any chance whatsoever of peace in the Middle East within the next decade, and that is very grave news for both the region and the world.
One can only speculate on the extraordinary hold the pro-Israel lobbies, such as AIPAC, have on the present administration in the White House although we know that two of his lieutenants, Rahm Emanuel his chief of staff and his top advisor, David Axelrod, are loyal AIPAC supporters.
It is, of course, common knowledge that Obama owes his election to president, almost entirely to the machinations of a pro-Israel cabal in Chicago - reputedly, within the legal and banking fraternities in that windy city. Unfortunately, it is increasingly difficult not to take away the impression that the Israeli government is controlling US foreign policy, not only in regard to Israel itself, but also in regard to Egypt, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Turkey and to some extent, also Afghanistan and Turkmenistan. That alleged sphere of influence, astonishingly extends from the Mediterranean eastwards, all the way to northern India and China.
In view of President Obama's capitulation to the right-wing, Netanyahu government, it would appear that it is now up to the European Union to exert pressure upon the Israeli government to conform to and comply with international law and agreed conventions on human rights. Israel enjoys substantial bilateral trade with the EU, that accounts for nearly one third of its GDP. That is the stick that the EU can bring to bear on the recalcitrant Israeli state.
Unfortunately, the EU has no similar stick to persuade the Obama administration to act like a world-power, rather than being subservient to a state less than one fiftieth of its size that is, in reality, kept afloat entirely by American aid.
Frankly, I never had any hope in Hillary ever going the bat for true peace between Israel and the Palestinians. President Obama on the other hand would like to see a two state solution, but, its seems he has been consumed by the insurmountable pressure of the American-Israeli lobby (AIPAC). Yet, who knows, Pres. Obama may still have the last card; absent genuine efforts for a two state solution, he may just opt to declare the U.S. recognition of the State of Palestine.
November 2, 2009 3:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Um, has anyone else noticed that this contains insane anti-Semitic conspiracy theory?
November 2, 2009 6:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why is it that any form criticism of the policies of the State of Israel and/or of any of its corrupt, extremist and intolerant leaders is immediately labeled as "antisemitic" by certain people?
I, for one, couldn't find anything INSANE or ANTISEMITIC in the post.
Just some hard truths that AIPAC supporters can't stomach (and many of which have already been brought up by none others than members of J-street)
Criticizing Israel's policies doesn't make us anti-Semitic just as criticising the actions of Palestinians, Egyptians or Saudis doesn't mean we're being anti-Islamic.
November 3, 2009 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did you read the post?
"It is, of course, common knowledge that Obama owes his election to president, almost entirely to the machinations of a pro-Israel cabal in Chicago - reputedly, within the legal and banking fraternities in that windy city."
I'll match my hatred of Israeli policy towards the Palestinians, and their bellicose militarism generally, against anyone's, but this is nothing but the rankest anti-Semitic conspiracy mongering.
Charges of anti-Semitism are often used to shut down legitimate debate. This post does not constitute legitimate debate.
November 3, 2009 1:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, this was just clinton shooting off her mouth and then having to walk it back like she did today!...It may have cost her her job--with luck! She has yet to come home from a too long trip without both feet in her mouth!
Her handlers need to stop the long trips if she survives this...though I doubt she should!
Obama may have to acknowledge that this was his first big mistake! He is strongly in favor of a two state solution --though some of his staff have pushed the stupid Israeli govrn't stance.. Rahm and Axelrod for instance...
The Arabs at the Morocco conference are not pleased with clinton--nor impressed. Read the foreign press--they are all over it! She is a wonk not a diplomat!
November 2, 2009 7:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
"President Obama's decision to withdraw his demand for the cessation of illegal settlement on the West Bank, in the face of the intransigence of Israel's Benyamin Netanyahu, has left him exposed, vulnerable and weak - and has almost certainly cost him, and the Democratic Party, a second term in office."
And Glen beck thought the sauce he puts on his sandwiches made him elitist...Get a grip. The fact that he did something you disagree with doesn't mean he won't get a second term. It's not that important.
November 2, 2009 7:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Forgot--as to owing the Presidential election to Chicago and a pro Israel cabal --that is utter BS..I campaigned in the trenches across the nation and his support was ever much broader--and considering that there are less than 9 million jews in the World it is unlikely their votes and donations made a dent in the election --Though they firmly supported the clintons--til they blew it!
BiBi is an old failed hawk who was 'selected' by Peres--because he was afraid of Livni...The Israeli govrn't has lost stature in the World with the atrocities coming to light daily in the treatment of the Palestinian people!
PS: So you do not get started - I am of Jewish decent..read J Street for a more informed and peaceful view!
November 2, 2009 7:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whaaaa? You have GOT to be kidding! He owes his election to all of us who, for the first time (and maybe the last) believed that he meant what he said: that we had the hope of change. We gave 20 and 50 bucks when we could, and knocked on doors. That is why he won. Israel is like a narcissistic-personality-disorder-country, and you are succumbing to it in your own way.
I think you are just a bit single-minded here.
If he is a single-term President, Israel will not be the reason.
November 2, 2009 7:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
It would seem that the Arab -- Israeli conundrum takes-up in inordinate amount of space on TPM. Post after post after post! If the anointed forum posters are obsessed with the quandary between the PLO\Hamas\Israel...So be it. I certainly have no control over content, but there is a thing called saturation. Where once I read these posts, I now, skip them. The whole bloody thing has turned into a pissing contest! Why not post the commentary in local newspapers with a moderate Jewish\Arab readership. Contrary to what our True Believers may conceive as the most significant item of this century, many of us have, what we consider, other pertinent concerns. Not demeaning the importance of the saturation posting...Just sounding more like opinionated bull shit than fact!
November 3, 2009 1:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Replying to comment from brewmn61
It is certainly not anti-Semitic conspiracy theory!
Obama was elected by a majority of American voters - that is taken as fact. It is also factual that his candidature was 'engineered and promoted' by the cabal, as mentioned. That, of course, is not illegitimate or in any way wrong. In fact, that is democracy.
My point, that you clearly misunderstood, was that Obama owes his selection and subsequent position as president to those lobbyists who put in so much effort in the first place. And they were, in the main, AIPAC activists who wished to have an AIPAC president. That is democracy, American style.
Only problem is that it is not conducive to either world peace or human rights.
November 3, 2009 2:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
"It is also factual that his candidature was 'engineered and promoted' by the cabal, as mentioned."
Well, if it is so "factual," maybe you should provide some facts to support it. I'm a member of the Chicago legal community, and this is the first I have ever heard of such a "cabal" (nice use of a loaded term there, by the way, Adolph.)
You're a fucking anti-Semite. Deal with it.
November 3, 2009 2:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Line by line:
"President Obama's decision to withdraw his demand for the cessation of illegal settlement on the West Bank, in the face of the intransigence of Israel's Benyamin Netanyahu, has left him exposed, vulnerable and weak - and has almost certainly cost him, and the Democratic Party, a second term in office."
No one here cares about Israel anyway. Certainly the 2012 elections will not turn on anything that happens in Israel (or doesn't). American Presidents have failed to make any progress in the Middle east for 60 years, and if anyone, only Carter paid a price for it.
"It has also scuppered any chance whatsoever of peace in the Middle East within the next decade, and that is very grave news for both the region and the world."
Wasn't counting on that anyway. And while it may be grave news for the region, it is mostly irrelevant to the rest of the world.
"One can only speculate on the extraordinary hold the pro-Israel lobbies, such as AIPAC, have on the present administration in the White House although we know that two of his lieutenants, Rahm Emanuel his chief of staff and his top advisor, David Axelrod, are loyal AIPAC supporters."
One need not speculate if it is known that the Presidents close advisors are staunchly Pro-Israel.
"It is, of course, common knowledge that Obama owes his election to president, almost entirely to the machinations of a pro-Israel cabal in Chicago - reputedly, within the legal and banking fraternities in that windy city."
Nonsense. This is neither common knowledge, nor true. It is tinfoil hat material, pure and simple.
"Unfortunately, it is increasingly difficult not to take away the impression that the Israeli government is controlling US foreign policy, not only in regard to Israel itself, but also in regard to Egypt, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Turkey and to some extent, also Afghanistan and Turkmenistan. That alleged sphere of influence, astonishingly extends from the Mediterranean eastwards, all the way to northern India and China."
Hyperbole. The United States is more strongly influenced by the Chinese government than the Israeli one.
"In view of President Obama's capitulation to the right-wing, Netanyahu government, it would appear that it is now up to the European Union to exert pressure upon the Israeli government to conform to and comply with international law and agreed conventions on human rights. Israel enjoys substantial bilateral trade with the EU, that accounts for nearly one third of its GDP. That is the stick that the EU can bring to bear on the recalcitrant Israeli state."
Good luck with that. The EU is a nonentity.
"Unfortunately, the EU has no similar stick to persuade the Obama administration to act like a world-power, rather than being subservient to a state less than one fiftieth of its size that is, in reality, kept afloat entirely by American aid."
I agree. We should cut off the aid. We won't, but we should. Israel has no strategic importance nor does it serve any national interest of the United States.
November 3, 2009 2:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Good luck with that. The EU is a nonentity."
That about sums up your 'detailed' knowledgeable rebuttal.
The EU is a trading block of 700 million - but you can safely ignore it. It's your call.
November 3, 2009 2:50 PM | Reply | Permalink