Rosenberg rages at Obama; Olmert urges ‘Peace Now’

Rosenberg rages at Obama; Olmert urges ‘Peace Now’

Two items: This essay by MJ Rosenberg (“On Israel and Palestine, Obama is Rick Perry“) is really hard on Obama.  I think that Obama is all we have right now and I’d rather see him in the Presidency than Rick Perry.  

Read what Lesley Hazleton wrote to me on this:

Lilly — your statement is an understatement.  Rosenberg’s is absurd.  We really have to stop this.
Obama is not what we hoped for, but it’s not as though we can’t see the bind he’s in, and the danger of Romney as president looms very large.  I am so tired of people saying there’s no difference, or that they won’t even bother to vote next year.  Are they nuts?  We all really need to get solidly behind Obama whatever our private reservations, otherwise we’re committing political suicide.         
Have liberals no political savvy at all?  (I’m very afraid that might be a rhetorical question…) — Lesley

And Ehud Olmert calls for “Peace Now, or Never” [in NY Times] Olmert at his best:

The parameters of a peace deal are well known and they have already been put on the table. I put them there in September 2008 when I presented a far-reaching offer to Mr. Abbas.

According to my offer, the territorial dispute would be solved by establishing a Palestinian state on territory equivalent in size to the pre-1967 West Bank and Gaza Strip with mutually agreed-upon land swaps that take into account the new realities on the ground.
The city of Jerusalem would be shared. Its Jewish areas would be the capital of Israel and its Arab neighborhoods would become the Palestinian capital. Neither side would declare sovereignty over the city’s holy places; they would be administered jointly with the assistance of Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the United States.
The Palestinian refugee problem would be addressed within the framework of the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative. The new Palestinian state would become the home of all the Palestinian refugees just as the state of Israel is the homeland of the Jewish people. Israel would, however, be prepared to absorb a small number of refugees on humanitarian grounds.
Because ensuring Israel’s security is vital to the implementation of any agreement, the Palestinian state would be demilitarized and it would not form military alliances with other nations. Both states would cooperate to fight terrorism and violence.
These parameters were never formally rejected by Mr. Abbas, and they should be put on the table again today. …

 A further delay will only help extremists on both sides who seek to sabotage any prospect of a peaceful, negotiated two-state solution. …

By | 2011-09-26T11:11:00-04:00 September 26th, 2011|Blog|0 Comments

Leave A Comment