• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Obama's proposal to go back to the 1967 borders

Flankerl

Well-Known Member
05252011.jpg

250px-Grand_Union_Flag.svg.png


:cool:
 

Rakhel

Well-Known Member
and isnt the 1967 borders really the 1948 armistice line, a line that was used in the 67 war by Jordan as not being a fixed boundary .




Heres what Reagan said in 1982


n the pre-1967 borders Israel was barely 10 miles wide at its narrowest point. The bulk of Israel's population lived within artillery range of hostile Arab armies. I am not about to ask Israel to live that way again... So the United States will not support the establishment of an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, and we will not support annexation or permanent control by Israel. There is, however, another way to peace. The final status of these lands must, of course, be reached through the give-and-take of negotiations; but it is the firm view of the United States that self-government by the Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza in association with Jordan offers the best chance for a durable, just and lasting peace. It is the United States' position that - in return for peace - the withdrawal provision of Resolution 242 applies to all fronts, including the West Bank and Gaza. When the border is negotiated between Jordan and Israel, our view on the extent to which Israel should be asked to give up territory will be heavily affected by the extent of true peace and normalization and the security arrangements offered in return. Finally, we remain convinced that Jerusalem must remain undivided, but its final status should be decided through negotiations.


United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Yes. when they talk about the '67 lines they are actually talking about the '48 lines they officially rejected. And as pointed out in another thread, Jordan, now, has no say in the matter because both countries set their borders in the 1994 treaty.
 

croak

Trickster
First, there was nothing new or radical in Obama's proposal and, if memory serves, he's not the first US president to propose something like this. Nor was he proposing restoring the original borders. The border change was to be based on the pre '67 line. This is also the opinion of every other country in the world as well as the UN.
This.

After studying the issue, the Obama regime, err, sorry, Administration has come out with this great idea that peace could be had if Israel simply went back to those former borders and that he would support a Palestinian nation state led by Hamas. Strangely, Hamas has rejected his proposal and the Israeli government under Benjamin Netanyahu has launched diplomatic, but withering, attacks on the whole load of nonsense issuing from the White House.
Now wherre did you get the idea that Hamas would lead a Palestinian state? Are you assuming that Fatah would just stand by and that the whole population would root for Hamas? Or that Hamas would turn into a dictatorship? I really don't get it.

Basically, Obama has done what pretty much every other American president has been doing for the past several decades. I don't see how this would surprise anyone.
 

Caladan

Agnostic Pantheist
I am surprised by the American gullibility in their negotiations. either they are giving a lip service to the Arabs, not a very good lip service I might add. or they have no concept of the georaphical disputes in this region and of the opinions of Benjamin Netanyahu, who has never supported the 1967 borders. hell I dont support it. it means that I can go to our balcony right now and see the newly born Palestinian state spread before me.
not very comforting. nor very realistic.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I am surprised by the American gullibility in their negotiations.
We ain't too impressed with Israeli intransigence & inability to make peace with their neighbors either.
Doing the same thing over & over again, with failure the result every time is no solution either.
Time for different approaches.
I give Obama credit for trying, but alas, I don't think he has the wherewithal to contribute anything useful.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
I am surprised by the American gullibility in their negotiations. either they are giving a lip service to the Arabs, not a very good lip service I might add. or they have no concept of the georaphical disputes in this region and of the opinions of Benjamin Netanyahu, who has never supported the 1967 borders. hell I dont support it. it means that I can go to our balcony right now and see the newly born Palestinian state spread before me.
not very comforting. nor very realistic.

I think that it is lip service. I suspect that both Israel and Palestine think that Obama is suffering from a temporary moment of insanity.

It's a stupid move whether it's lip service or not, and it's only a bit more odious if he's serious.

The only thing that keeps this move from being totally insane is that Israel is not going to do it. Ever.
 

Reverend Rick

Frubal Whore
Premium Member
We ain't too impressed with Israeli intransigence & inability to make peace with their neighbors either.
Doing the same thing over & over again, with failure the result every time is no solution.
Time for different approaches.
Alas, I don't think Obama has the wherewithal to contribute anything useful.

Rev, you assume there is a solution.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
We ain't too impressed with Israeli intransigence & inability to make peace with their neighbors either.
Doing the same thing over & over again, with failure the result every time is no solution.
Time for different approaches.
I give Obama credit for trying, but alas, I don't think he has the wherewithal to contribute anything useful.

That's beside the point. He has a ton of advisors, and apparently this is what they are telling him to do. This doesn't speak to him personally as much as it does his entire foreign relations team.

And to be fair, no one has ever known what to do with the Palestinian // Israeli conflict.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
That's beside the point. He has a ton of advisors, and apparently this is what they are telling him to do. This doesn't speak to him personally as much as it does his entire foreign relations team.
Beside the point? Nah....tis germain.
He runs the show, & decides how to use the advice given him.

And to be fair, no one has ever known what to do with the Palestinian // Israeli conflict.
Also true, but some are better equipped to give it the ole college try than others.
 

Caladan

Agnostic Pantheist
There are many Americans who are just as surprised that our President could be so ignorant. Actually, I am ashamed.
These negotiations have been going on for so long. and the stands of the key political figures have usually been clear. Benjamin Netanyahu made it clear that he will not fall back to the 1967 borders, he has also made his stand on Jerusalem clear.
Why would an American president expect Israel to make such concessions. without even beginning to understand the history behind this borders reality.
 
Last edited:
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
Beside the point? Nah....tis germain.
He runs the show, & decides how to use the advice given him.

Also true, but some are better equipped to give it the ole college try than others.

Perhaps, but what good is how hard one tries if one fails.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
These negotiations have been going on for so long. and the stands of the key political figures have usually been clear. Benjamin Netanyahu made it clear in his negotiations that he will not fall back to the 1967 borders, he has also made his stand on Jerusalem clear.
Why would an American president expect Israel to make such concessions. without even beginning to understand the history behind these borders reality.

I don't think that he does.
 

Caladan

Agnostic Pantheist
Perhaps, but what good is how hard one tries if one fails.
you are absolutely right.
the stands of Israel and the stand of the Palestinians are pretty straigthtforward. there is no point in telling us of the benefits of peace and how we all deserve to live a normal life. no one here looks for visions of peace. we just look for a normal solution. the Israelis arent going to let go of their leverage, the Palestinians are in a bunker. its the case as it has always been.
the middle east is filled with some of the most stiff necked people on earth. no one likes to budge an inch here, because we know that someone else will come and take an extra mile.
 

Mathematician

Reason, and reason again
The whole place should be nuked and handed over to people of more diplomatic religions since none of the three major Abrahamic sects seem to show any true concern for their holy land. I say give the Sikhs a try.

I'm kidding. Somewhat.
 
Last edited:

Reverend Rick

Frubal Whore
Premium Member
If making concessions where the solution, Israel would have fixed the problem years ago.

How on earth could anyone even consider making any deal when they can't bargain in good faith?

If you cannot get the basic concept that you have a right to even exist, I don't see the point of discussing things further.
 

Caladan

Agnostic Pantheist
The whole place should be nuked and handed over to people of more diplomatic religions since none of the three major Abrahamic sects seem to show any true concern or their holy land. Let's say the Sikhs.
Sure hand it to men with dreadlocks and knives.
hold on. that sounds like the Israelis.

I'm kidding. Somewhat.
 
Top