It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Netanyahu wants "maximum understanding" with U.S

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 7 2009 @ 09:20 AM

Netanyahu wants "maximum understanding" with U.S

JERUSALEM (Reuters) – Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday he would strive for "maximum understanding" with Washington on peace issues but gave no sign he intends to bow to its demand to halt settlement expansion.

Under pressure from U.S. President Barack Obama over settlements in the occupied West Bank and Palestinian statehood, which Netanyahu has not endorsed, the Israeli leader said he would set out his policies in a major speech later this month.

(visit the link for the full news article)

posted on Jun, 7 2009 @ 09:20 AM
An interesting choice of words?

Seems to be a clear response to President Obama on the settlement issues.

Quote from the article:

Despite the rare rift with the United States, Israel's main ally, Israeli officials said Netanyahu has no intention of risking the collapse of his coalition by ceasing all settlement activity in the West Bank.

Maximum understanding?

Or maximum rejection of Obama's call to halt the expansion of settlements?

Is there a possibility that Israel will become an enemy of the USA, and more particularly the Obama administration?

Up next, the Iranian nuclear issue.

Interesting, if not dangerous times lie ahead. President Obama has tried to make both sides happy, and seems to have alienated the Israeli regime in the process. If President Obama does eventually choose a side in the conflict which will it be?
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 7-6-2009 by Walkswithfish]

posted on Jun, 7 2009 @ 09:31 AM
As long as Netanyahu is in office the expansion will continue. He has always been a hardliner when it comes to the land won in the Arab-Israeli war. On top of that there are far too many people in Israel that agree with increasing settlement landgrabs. In the end you have to wonder why this continues , knowing that it will increase the violence as well as decrease Israel's overall security. Makes no damn sense.

posted on Jun, 7 2009 @ 09:48 AM
At this point Obama is irelevent. What matters are the members of congress that AIPAC, and thus the Israeli government, have on it's payroll. They are the ones that will have to rubberstamp any changes whether Obama likes it or not. While the Israeli government has that stranglehold on US politics, nothing will change at all. They'll keep sending the cash and arms in return for money and political backing, whether it serves America or not.

Maybe if Obama threatened to stop the flow of money & arms and told the Israelis to comply with past, but still in force, UN resolutions that they openly ignore, then he might actually have some influence. On the other hand his life expectancy might become very short!

posted on Jun, 7 2009 @ 10:26 AM

Originally posted by Britguy
At this point Obama is irelevent.


He is the President of Israel's top ally he is very relevant, regardless of his policies or position.

The problem as I see it has been the President's attempt to assuage the Muslim/Arab side despite Israeli concerns, he has in a way alienated them. Israelis already feel as if the world has failed to "understand" the threats to their existance, as well as the growing Palestinian problems, more importantly the complexity of these problems.

Israel could easily be pushed to hard by this administration in a direction they are not ready or willing to go, change may come fast in the USA for this president, it will not be so quick to come in the Middle East.

How many times throughout history have presidents tried and failed to address the Israeli/Palestinian peace issues?

None I can recall have taken such a clear stand in opposition to Israel as the current President Obama has.

The fact that he went to Cairo to speak to the Muslims of the world, while only 250 miles from Israel he completely avoided a trip to Israel even for only a brief meeting, that alone has sent a strong message to the Israelis.

In my opinion this will only serve to embolden the Israeli resolve to address its broader security concerns, and perhaps hasten their plans to launch preemptive strikes on Iran to remove what they see as the gravest threat to their existance.

The President should be more careful in dealing with BOTH sides of these issues, or perhaps should consider a more neutral stance, a hands off position if you will.

This country does not need to be further involved in Middle Eastern Conflicts that are not a direct threat to our own security.

President Obama, you had better be very careful going forward.

posted on Jun, 7 2009 @ 10:48 AM
At what point has any President been relevant? Obama is just up there to look good and tell people what they want to hear. It's not about the information, it's about how the information is presented. Most would rather enjoy the rock show than be bothered with the issues. Hence, why the system will not be changed.

[edit on 7-6-2009 by SphinxMontreal]

posted on Jun, 7 2009 @ 11:00 AM

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
At what point has any President been relevant?

In regard to the Israeli, Palestinian issues the US president is very relevant. Do you have any idea how much aid the US has, is and will provide to the Israelis?

Perhaps you are right in your post with the Rock Star comment, this president craves adoration wherever he goes and will apparently say or do anything to get applause and a boost to his ego.

The problem is that in the Middle East words from the president can come with consequences.

In recent times seeing this president play both sides of the fence in the way he has will likely be seen as a clear sign of weakness in this president.

He needs to publicly choose a side in this conflict and stick with it, or beyond becoming irrelevant, he could become a target for extremists on both sides.

posted on Jun, 7 2009 @ 01:03 PM
President Obama has a unique opportunity to re-cast US/Israeli relations in ways that will prove, in the long run, more mutually beneficial to Both nations:

but only if Israel can come to recognize that she is no longer "the Tail that wags the Dog".

Obama must strive to make clear to the leadership of Israel that, as the US, for it's own survival as a world power, moves away from dependence on foreign (ie.: Mid-East) oil, its influence in the region will begin to wane.

It therefore behooves Israel, if she desires a continued, long and (relatively) peaceful existence, to learn how to "win friends and influence" her neighbors in the region, independent of the US.

Israel must be made to realize that, in this new reality, the US is no longer the powerful and protective power it once was, and has little desire to become so once again.

It's every man (country) for himself.

Learn it, Live it....Or regret it.

posted on Jun, 7 2009 @ 02:48 PM
Obama is a man who craves instantaneous approval from whatever crowd he is currently addressing. His comments in Cairo troubled me. They may be interpreted by Israel as an abandonment by the US. If Netanyahu concludes that this is the case, he will not be swayed to 'play nice' in the region. As well he shouldn't, since he is surrounded by enemies who want to destroy Israel.

Instead, Netanyahu will move forward without consulting the US. He cannot be faulted for doing so. His responsibility is to protect Israel, not to appease the lap dog Obama.

posted on Jun, 7 2009 @ 02:51 PM
reply to post by Walkswithfish

Smoke and mirrors, why do some of these people bother giving press releases as we know that the uk, usa, and israel are always going to be together so why bother pretending that obama is against this and that.

posted on Jun, 7 2009 @ 03:12 PM
That’s great! Tell Benjamin that my part of the U.S.A. (me) thinks Israel is a fascist, genocidal state, bent on blackmail, intimidation and murder to try to dominate the entire Middle East from the brooks of Egypt to the Mesopotamian Delta and I don’t like him or Israel! I especially don’t like the AIPAC Lobby crowd and think no one holding dual citizenship in American and Israel should be allowed to participate in an official capacity in the American Government let alone someone like Michael Chertof former Homeland (NAZI sounding if there ever was such a thing) Security Director of the United States of America. Oh and I don’t like the fact that the current White House Chief of Staff has served in the IDF or his dad is a renowned Zionist terrorist either.

That’s simple enough to understand right?

Wake up America!

new topics

top topics


log in