Mid East policy speech

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by flacaltenn

FinnBow:

I'm not really buying that it's the same-0.. I must not have been following Camp David and the peace attempts for the past 30 years or my ears haven't been working..

Let's try some logic.

1) If you START with 1967 borders as an initial condition --- Then
2) In order to swap for anything, Israel has to give UP acreage that it held prior to 1967.
3) The end result being that Israel loses land it held prior to 1967.

NEVER was in the cards previously.. You'd have to give me concrete examples...

What parts of pre-67 Israel were EVER on the table in serious negotiations other than "joint use" travel corridors that amounted to road access?

I guess my point is that I really don't give much of a rat's ass exactly where the ultimate border of a two-state solution is drawn. There is no magic line, although Israel's ongoing (illegal in many minds) settlement policy is all about shaping the "facts on the ground" in their favor (and at our expense in terms of our relationships with everybody in the world except Israel).

Clinton, Dubya and Obama all have had pretty much the same position vis-a-vis 1967 borders with land swaps, although everybody (including Obama until last week) was careful to fine-tune their message with a certain amount of ambiguity out of fear of AIPAC's wrath.

I've long since tired of our kowtowing to Israel and its Zionist ambitions. I, like most Americans, reflexively sided with Israel until I spent two weeks there in ~1983 travelling all over the country, including the West Bank. Their treatment of Palestinians that I personally witnessed changed my views a bit as to the unquestionable righteousness of their cause and our country's blind fealty to it.