Trading outposts for large settlement blocs http://blogs.jta.org/ENTRY_PERMALINK_HERE/trading-outposts-for-large-settlement-blocs/ If Benjamin Netanyahu insists on keeping illegal settlement outposts, he will be defending lawlessness and harming Israel’s interests, writesHa’aretz columnist Ari Shavit. And if Obama refuses to recognize that large settlement blocs near the Green Line will become part of Israel, he will be destroying President Clinton’s legacy. But if Obama and Netanyahu formulate an outposts-for-blocs policy, they will be serving their countries’ interests, as well as promoting a realistic peace process. en-us uheilman@jta.org Copyright 2009 2009-07-09T;18:33:00-05:00 Comment by Joel Rosenthal rojo.editor@verizon.net Dennis, I agree with with most of what you said that doesn’t pertain to President Obama. I think he is very concerned about Iran becoming a nuclear power. Honestly, I think the chances of success for any attempt to remove Iran’s nuclear threat will be low if the entire world knows about it in advance. So I really don’t want to read in the news about what the West’s plans are for stopping the Iranians. And Barack Obama is NOT going to force Israel to accept a Palestinian state if the Palestinians don’t accept Israel’s inalienable right to exist in secure and recognized borders. I don’t think the “Pals” will accept, so I have to disagree with your statement that “the Pals can have their state.” I think we both know that the Palestinians won’t miss this opporturtunity to miss another opportunity--they will never give peace a chance because they truly don’t know how. Dennis, I agree with with most of what you said that doesn’t pertain to President Obama. I think he is very concerned about Iran becoming a nuclear power. Honestly, I think the chances of success for any attempt to remove Iran’s nuclear threat will be low if the entire world knows about it in advance. So I really don’t want to read in the news about what the West’s plans are for stopping the Iranians.

And Barack Obama is NOT going to force Israel to accept a Palestinian state if the Palestinians don’t accept Israel’s inalienable right to exist in secure and recognized borders. I don’t think the “Pals” will accept, so I have to disagree with your statement that “the Pals can have their state.” I think we both know that the Palestinians won’t miss this opporturtunity to miss another opportunity--they will never give peace a chance because they truly don’t know how.

]]> 2012-02-09T;19:12:00-05:00 Comment by Dennis S. Kite dsk007@cox.net Barack Obama seems to be overly concerned about Jewish people living in the West Bank.  By contrast, he seems unconcerned about Iran developing nuclear weapons and missiles which can accurately deliver them.  I was concerned that this would happen given he has zero foreign relations experience and a bunch of Jimmy Carter retreads advising him on this subject.  The root of the problem has always been the refusal by Arab leaders(except Anwar Sadat and King Hussein) to recognize and accept Israel as a permanent and legitimate country in the middle east.  Now Obama wants Israel to recognize a Palestinian state without the Palestinians and other Arabs/Islamists to accept Israel as a Jewish state. This is the invisible hand of Jimmy Carter and his pro-Arab policies taking hold of the new administration.  I think the suggested solution posed by the article is a valid one, but the security of Israel must be guaranteed before any more land is traded. Israel must have defendable borders, and no more mass missile attacks can be launched from relinquished territory (as is the case in Gaza).  At this time, Israel is only 9 miles wide in the central part of the country, and it would be all too easy for Hamas or Islamic Jihad or another terror group to launch missiles from relinquished land at Israel’s only international airport, or at Jerusalem or Tel Aviv.  The Pals can have their state, but it must be a peaceful one that does not threaten to wipe out or destroy Israel.  If some of the West Bank outposts were built illegally, they should be dismantled in a final peace agreement, but the major suburban areas such as Gush Etzion block or Maale Adumin need to become a part of Israel, and this idea of a complete “freeze” on growth there is stupid, shortsighted, and discriminatory. Barack Obama seems to be overly concerned about Jewish people living in the West Bank.  By contrast, he seems unconcerned about Iran developing nuclear weapons and missiles which can accurately deliver them.  I was concerned that this would happen given he has zero foreign relations experience and a bunch of Jimmy Carter retreads advising him on this subject.  The root of the problem has always been the refusal by Arab leaders(except Anwar Sadat and King Hussein) to recognize and accept Israel as a permanent and legitimate country in the middle east.  Now Obama wants Israel to recognize a Palestinian state without the Palestinians and other Arabs/Islamists to accept Israel as a Jewish state. This is the invisible hand of Jimmy Carter and his pro-Arab policies taking hold of the new administration.  I think the suggested solution posed by the article is a valid one, but the security of Israel must be guaranteed before any more land is traded. Israel must have defendable borders, and no more mass missile attacks can be launched from relinquished territory (as is the case in Gaza).  At this time, Israel is only 9 miles wide in the central part of the country, and it would be all too easy for Hamas or Islamic Jihad or another terror group to launch missiles from relinquished land at Israel’s only international airport, or at Jerusalem or Tel Aviv.  The Pals can have their state, but it must be a peaceful one that does not threaten to wipe out or destroy Israel.  If some of the West Bank outposts were built illegally, they should be dismantled in a final peace agreement, but the major suburban areas such as Gush Etzion block or Maale Adumin need to become a part of Israel, and this idea of a complete “freeze” on growth there is stupid, shortsighted, and discriminatory.

]]> 2012-02-09T;19:12:00-05:00