> The 67 lines + swaps has been de facto US policy for decades period. > Documented fact and undisputed by anyone with knowledge of such > things. > The Bush letter says otherwise. Yes, land swap was there but the 67 lines were not. Except maybe for the state department but they have their own government apart from America's.
> What's different is that Obama came out and publicly said it. Why is > that different? > > Because use 67 as a starting point is a bargaining chip, specifically > Bibi's bargaining chip. A chip Bibi didn't want to give away, but > that every Israeli PM has given away in talks. > Maybe but it was not Obama's chip to give away. Every PM of Israel has given close to the 67 line with land swap but never to the line. Security has always been the key. > The key point is, by saying it out loud, Obama gave away Bibi's chip > which, the US would argue, isn't worth shit because in 30 years it's > bought nothing, or worse than nothing. > A chip is a chip and taking it away removes bargaining power. Obama's meddling in negotiations here by removing Israel's position. If he did that to any other land dispute he would be blasted through the roof. Can you imagine him doing what he does to Israel to Turkey or Cyprus? To China or Tibet? > So what Obama did was decide to shake things up by breaking the old > mold, the one that hasn't worked. > > Bibi (and Likud) see that as not Obama's place to do, thus the hissy fit. > Hissy fit? He stuck to the same position that every PM stood by. Any land swap would be based on security which means not going back to 67. I guess when a sovereign nation makes a stand against American meddling in their affairs it's a hissy fit. A LOT of Jews are looking at Obama's actions and are getting totally disillusioned. Even and especially those who are/were in his camp. I guess all of those Jews are throwing a hissy fit at Obama as well. Actually, if you want a hissy fit, listen to Gene Simmons blasting Obama. > Well too damn bad. Everybody is sick of this shit and the > Palestinians are bustin a move so the US is trying to force talks by > shaking things up. > So how about he shakes things up by making a demand of the Palestinians? How about he say that the US will not stand by the 'right of return'? How about he say anything other than a vague mention of something being counter productive? His demands against Israel has caused the Palestinians to just dig their heels in deeper, make more demands, and just stop any negotiations. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:338209 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
