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.

 

Most Israelis disagree with Netanyahu and agree with 1967 borders

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 26 2011 @ 08:08 PM
link   
Not all Israelis are nutjobs like Netanyahu... they are in fact the minority.

Israel PM should have said 'yes' to Obama: poll

The majority of Israelis believe their prime minister should have supported US President Barack Obama's outline for new peace talks with the Palestinians, according to a poll published on Wednesday.

The survey, published in the Maariv newspaper, found 10 percent of Israelis thought Benjamin Netanyahu should have "declared his support for the president's remarks with no reservations."

Another 46.8 percent said the Israeli leader should have expressed support "but with reservations," while 36.7 percent said Netanyahu should have declared his opposition to Obama's principles for the peace process.

But not only that.

Netanyahu 2011 disagrees with Netanyahu 2010 :
Hillary Clinton And Netanyahu Agreed On 1967 As Basis For Talks Just This Past November

The Prime Minister and the Secretary agreed on the importance of continuing direct negotiations to achieve our goals. The Secretary reiterated that “the United States believes that through good-faith negotiations, the parties can mutually agree on an outcome which ends the conflict and reconciles the Palestinian goal of an independent and viable state, based on the 1967 lines, with agreed swaps, and the Israeli goal of a Jewish state with secure and recognized borders that reflect subsequent developments and meet Israeli security requirements.”


This looks like a big set up by Netanyahu and Obama...




posted on May, 26 2011 @ 08:28 PM
link   
how can the onus of peace be put on the victims of a military occupation and not the aggressors and perpetrators.

it doesn't even make sense. it's like a prisoner having to convince the state for a release. if the state feels like saying no that's the end of the story.

it's israel in the position to grant peace or not. not the palestinians.



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


Thats why we should not blame the people of a country. We have to blame the people behind the government.



posted on May, 27 2011 @ 04:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by randomname
how can the onus of peace be put on the victims of a military occupation and not the aggressors and perpetrators.

it doesn't even make sense. it's like a prisoner having to convince the state for a release. if the state feels like saying no that's the end of the story.

it's israel in the position to grant peace or not. not the palestinians.


It is all well and good for Israel to say "ok, we were wrong, have your land back, its over now" but what is the point if within a month, all those people who have grown up with a deep seeded hatred of Israel, shouting mantras like "KILL ALL JEWS" (this doesn't represent all palestinians, but when i was in israel/palestine last year, this IS what was being chanted...) all decide that they have half their country back, why not go for it all?

unfortunately with the kind of urban guerilla warfare that goes on over there, its not simply enough for governments to talk and sign agreements. for some people, the extremists of both sides, there is no two state solution, end of story. and i tell you what, as someone who spends a lot of time in the region, it is definitely not the non-extremists i am worried about...



posted on May, 27 2011 @ 04:52 AM
link   
Since when has the wishes of the people ever mattered, unless their government benefit from it somehow?



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 03:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


:O

Does this mean most Israelis *aren't* brutal genocidal maniacs?

This could be shocking news to some people.

One thing I'm not surprised by is the lack of exposure and interest this thread is getting.

Threads that expose the moderate majority, or display the humanity and civility of either side are simply not as interesting as your typical "Israel evil, Palestine Good" (and vice versa) war mongering propaganda bull#.

Sadly, this immature polarity of opinions dominates these boards.

With respect,
Eliad.



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 04:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Eliad
 


I have to agree with you and disagree with you on that one. There have been many thread like this giving liberal and moderate Israeli's/Jews exposure, however we do not condone and praise their actions enough.



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 04:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Eliad
reply to post by Vitchilo
 

:O
Does this mean most Israelis *aren't* brutal genocidal maniacs?
This could be shocking news to some people.
One thing I'm not surprised by is the lack of exposure and interest this thread is getting.
Threads that expose the moderate majority, or display the humanity and civility of either side are simply not as interesting as your typical "Israel evil, Palestine Good" (and vice versa) war mongering propaganda bull#.
Sadly, this immature polarity of opinions dominates these boards.
With respect,
Eliad.


I disagree mate..
Most posters complain about the atrocities committed by the Israeli Government, not the Israeli people..

It's usually the other side screaming "your just anti Semitic or a jew hater"...

Lets remember, most here disagree with what the US Government also does and I and others disagree with what my Australian Government does..

It's just with Israel where the shills jump in..



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 06:05 AM
link   
The 67' borders are the only reasonable starting point for a real discussion between the Israelis and Palestinians on what the final borders could be. The president is right: land swaps can be made to allow some compromises for both sides.

Under international law they are the only borders legally recognized, and even Israel has yet to publish a map of its boundaries which would supercede them.

I'm glad even Israelis haven't bought the radical right line that the current borders are 100 percent non-negotiable. Even Bibi conceded he is willing to swap land for peace, but won't state his starting point for negotiation -- which would lead any reasonable observer to question his commitment to peace talks at all.

I don't think he is negotiating for peace at all in good faith but represents the U.S./Israeli M.I.C.'s point-of-view: eternal war and eternal profits.
edit on 29-5-2011 by brianboru because: spelling/grammar



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join