Skip to main content

View Diary: Ask Senators For Balance In MidEast "Dear Colleague" Letter (Updated) (235 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  volley (0+ / 0-)

    i was giving him a taste of his own medicine. those were his words in case you missed it:

    Thus you oppose peace. (0+ / 0-)

    If you oppose negotiations then you oppose peace.

    It's as simple as that.

    when he says it, it is so much less objectional don't you think?

    as for

    I can tell you that no one except for one or two posters (Karma is not one) is for keeping the settlements expanding.

    well that is very interesting volley because he is certainly for letting them expand presently leading up to negotiations, and during negotiations. and in case you missed it he has already stated this:

    Israel will not remove those settlers because the trauma of trying to do so will be too much for such a small country.

    in my book not freezing growth means being pro growth w/the understanding no settlers will be removed ('too much for such a small country'). this is highly antagonistic to the entire process but of course you already know that.

    it also sets lots of (facts on the ground) preconditions. it basically says israel is going into the negotiations with certain conditions it is inflexible about (like continuing to build away day after day expanding every single minute and all of that will end up in our favor because we won't be leaving we will only be negotiating the terms in which we stay hence no ethnic cleansing ESPECIALLY in EJ which cannot be negotiated!). now it is all well and good to say 'i am in favor of ending the occupation' but what exactly does that mean if every word out of your mouth is accusing your partner of opposing peace if you don't agree to the set conditions prior to negotiations? by israels standards it can just as easily say it is not occupying the WB or EJ, it is only allowing for enough 'security' to protect who is already there, for an interm period until everything has calmed down, like the next 20 years to be extended depending on facts on the ground.

    anyway, so good of you to intercept wrt me using karmas words. my post was a snark, besides didn't i just tell him i was done with him?

    ps, i look forward to you telling karma you know his words are not true, you know we don't oppose negotiations nor do we oppose peace. thanks!

    •  Wow zannie I just read your two posts here (0+ / 0-)

      I am gonna give you some volleyboy chill pills. Look I can see this whole thing got you fired up and I see you going guns blazing here but, hold your fire for a sec.

      This comment that is getting you really pissed:

      Israel will not remove those settlers because the trauma of trying to do so will be too much for such a small country.

      can be read another way. I don't see Karma saying no removal of settlements here, what he is conveying is the government of Israel has followed this rationale. This is a common argument that removing the settlements will cause civil war. There is some truth to that.. it doesn't mean you don't do it but understand there are consequences to that action.

      Now as far as my feelings. You know them - but, giving Obama a letter to take to the Israelis stressing normalization BFD. It gives him political cover. So what. I don't think that Obama should back off on the settlement freeze but, it has to be sold to the Israelis as something for them. No one negotiates out of the goodness of their hearts (well I do but that is a diff. story lol). Impress on the Israelis the economic costs, man-hours of the IDF, If Bibi is a fiscal conservative he should be looking at the settlers as a bad budget line item.

      What is the harm in this approach? If Obama sticks to his guns on this - then let them phrase any which way as long as it leads to a settlement freeze. Look, Israel has the guns, money, and support of the American people but they don't have the feeling that they are totally secure. Let Obama coddle that feeling - it's diplomacy. His Cairo speech was brilliant - it went right to the heart of the matter and he gets the feelings on both sides.

      Israel is not some cartoon state run by Snidely Whiplash - If they feel America is 100% in their corner they will be way more cooperative. I am telling you this because I know it.

      As a suggestion, check out what the settlers argue and how they argue. Not from anti-Israel blogs but, from their blogs. There are some crazy ideas there but, wade through that and there is a rationale. Kind of a twisted rationale but a rationale.

      I don't generally like the settlers, the ones I have interacted with (a fair amount) are self-righteous and generally faintly racist as well as judeo-centric. But there are other sides too. I am not trying to get you to like them - hell I don't even like them but, understanding them and their meme's is important.

      Everyone tries to get me to look at the nuance of Hamas - ok, fine - look at the nuance of the Israeli right - both movements have more similarities than differences.

      This has to be handled carefully that is the point he is making.

      Plus Karma gets hot-headed and shoots off sometimes as I have seen you do and I know I do.

      Pigs are not notably aerodynamic, are they?

      by volleyboy1 on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 03:42:07 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (149)
  • Community (65)
  • Elections (43)
  • Civil Rights (38)
  • 2016 (32)
  • Culture (32)
  • Baltimore (28)
  • Law (27)
  • Texas (27)
  • Economy (27)
  • Environment (26)
  • Bernie Sanders (26)
  • Hillary Clinton (24)
  • Labor (23)
  • Rescued (21)
  • Barack Obama (20)
  • Health Care (20)
  • Republicans (18)
  • Freddie Gray (17)
  • International (17)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site