It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bush urges Israeli occupation end

page: 1
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Bush urges Israeli occupation end


news.bbc.co.uk

US President George W Bush has said Israel must end occupation of Arab land taken in 1967 so that a viable Palestinian state can be created.
He also urged a solution to the Palestinian refugee issue which would involve paying compensation.

This is thought to be the first time Mr Bush has publicly pressed the Israelis to give up occupied land.

Mr Bush was speaking in Jerusalem after two days of talks with Israeli and Palestinian leaders.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
news.bbc.co.uk




posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 10:31 AM
link   
firstly WTF, i almost spilt my drink all over my keyboard
is this Bush early (very early april fools?)

This is a excellent. the only way there will be peace if Israel ends its occupation.
The Arabs already gave this option to Israel

Hopefully Israel will agree and the Arabs

The arab roadmap to peace which was preasented to Israel a while back
also the link below where the king of Jordan preasented it to the US congress.



news.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)


Ultimatly this would take away the ammo from Hammas which would also Test them.

[edit on 10-1-2008 by bodrul]



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 10:53 AM
link   
I nearly fainted too when I read this news...

This is huge news, I believe he is the first US President to say such a thing? Well, apart from Carter.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 10:58 AM
link   
I think Bush sr said something like this as well, and a few days later, thanks to Israeli Lobby groups bullying him, he changed his stance and didn't say anything else that would place Israel in a bad light.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out, when Bush gets back to the US and the Israeli lobby groups confront him.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 11:12 AM
link   
It's a shocker, that's for sure - I just spent 5 minutes frantically wiping my screen and keyboard after I spat my lemsip out in astonishment.

Now if he'd just back off from iran - no wait, I don't think my delicate poorly system could take it.
Someone tell him to wait til I'm better.

I kind of understand why the israeli's are how they are, but that doesn't mean I agree with them.

This really could do a lot for a proper lasting peace in the region - I just hope he means it.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 11:26 AM
link   
Well if Israel backed off then the Arab world would start to loose their anti-Israel reasons. Maybe for once those rich Arab states will actually help the Palestine and not just blame Israel for everything while not lifting a finger.

Egypt had that land for years and did less than Israel to help them. They would not even recognized them or give them Egyptian status in anyway. I feel this has all been just a big propaganda tool to use against Israel by the Arab states, and to remove the effectiveness of that tool will go a long way in reducing reasons to maintain the tension.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 11:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


for once i agree with you
Egypt have even built tourisum around Israeli citizens

and yes the Arabs would lose their reasons to be against Israel
if you read the Speach from King abdullah of jordan the Arab peace process is this. they have also extended an arm of friendship with full Diplomatic relations and recognition by all arab states

[edit on 10-1-2008 by bodrul]



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 11:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJMessiah
It will be interesting to see how this plays out, when Bush gets back to the US and the Israeli lobby groups confront him.


well, he is lame duck President, so I cannot see them wasting time to go after him. Unless they focus on the Republican Party instead?



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 12:52 PM
link   
i kind of expected more replies to this as its the first Time a US president in a very long time that has taken this step

oh well



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by bodrul
 


Was Bush for the first time pressing for a Palestinian state since 2001?



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by deltaboy
 


this is the first time i have heard of him calling for a withdrawl 1967 boarders and using the Arab roadmap to peace which was preasented to them



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by bodrul
this is the first time i have heard of him calling for a withdrawl 1967 boarders and using the Arab roadmap to peace which was preasented to them


bodrul is right, President Bush did not call for the end of the occupation, he was just the first US President to use the term "Palestinian State". Clinton didn't believe in a two-state solution, even though Tony Blair pushed him hard.

The question is, will it happen even with United States pressure? I'm not sure. If we are to see a Palestinian State, American politicians need to stop the settlement funding from their fellow citizens. Which is going to be ugly.

Remember, it's election year. No one is going to stand up and say anything hostile towards Israel. It will cost votes and donations.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 01:23 PM
link   
I wouldn't get too terribly excited about it guys, in a word, it's called rhetoric. If Bush really wanted Israel to do anything tangible, he'd threaten to pull that $134,791,507,200 dollar teet out of their mouths.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 01:26 PM
link   
Perhaps he has threatened a reduction, behind closed doors, after all, it's not the kind of thing that gets said in a public speech - looks too much like blackmail (greenmail?) which of course is exactly what it is.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 01:45 PM
link   
Ok it's official the world is about to end.

I'm surprised at his comment. Never saw that coming at all.


Originally posted by twitchy
... he'd threaten to pull that $134,791,507,200 dollar teet out of their mouths.


Wow that's some expensive breast milk.

You may be right it could just be rhetoric.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 01:47 PM
link   
This is the most surprising part, he mentions the "security" wall...



"Someday I hope that as a result of the formation of a Palestinian state that there won't be walls and checkpoints -- people will be able to move freely in a democratic state."


Not everyday a US President, backed by the Christian right, makes a statement like that.

Bush does, also, mention the settlements and has even said Palestinian refugees should be compensated


[edit on 10-1-2008 by infinite]



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 02:25 PM
link   
Well unless the Federal Reserve is abolished so that our monetary system is brought back into constitutional legality, and unless our mass media is pushed back to regulatory anti-trust measures, Jewish interests will remain the dominant engine driving our economy and steering public opinion, and despite his rhetorical illusions of concern for the issue, Bush isn't going to bite the hand that feeds him. The man just handed them 500 million bucks a few years ago to help them pull out of illegal settlements in Pallestine, Israel took that money, pulled out and moved right back merely in a year later, and no, they didn't give the 500 million back.
Israel has no intention of a peaceful resolution, their policy from the start of their 'nation' in the 60's was to make life so miserable for Pallestinians as to force their immigration out of occupied territories and it has been a humanitarian crisis for them there ever since.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by bodrul
 


As someone else said, its just more rhetoric added onto the pile.

I don't see the Israelis leaving the Middle East anytime soon. The article mentions giving back land that was taken in the 1967 (Arab War?) conflict.

Unless the government of Israel is abolished, they will not retreat from the area.

Its wishful thinking, but unlikely my friends...



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 08:19 PM
link   
Signing a peace treaty is one thing. Abiding by it is quite another. I think I will wait for the vidfeo on this one. GWB is nothing but a gasbag waiting to explode IMHO



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 08:41 PM
link   
Or it could be this...

Bush wants a legacy. He promises Israel he will stage an event to attack Iran for Israel, and in return Israel will begin to back away from the settlements. But as the middle east is in turmoil, and the other arab states getting nervous because of the increased US presence, the real agenda will unfold.

Attack on US mainland, Martial Law, no election. The proverbial # hits the fan.

Just a guess...



AAC



new topics

top topics



 
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join