Obama's Israel speech fodder for the presidential election

[steve2470]

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-us-israel-20110522,0,2676708.story

Reporting from Washington— Hours after President Obama gave a major speech on the Middle East, Rep. Michele Bachmann flooded Iowa with automated phone calls and posted an online petition calling his approach "an insult to Israel."

But Bachmann, a potential Republican presidential candidate, wasn't necessarily appealing to the state's tiny Jewish vote. Evangelical Christians were a richer target, voters who are staunchly pro-Israel and who might have been unnerved by Obama's call for a peace agreement based partly on boundaries in place before Israel's territorial gains in the 1967 war.

Bachmann's move underscores the shifting politics surrounding Israel. A presidential candidate seen as confrontational toward Israel once might have feared backlash from American Jewish voters. But Obama's standing in the Jewish community remains strong because he has answered a threshold question: He has satisfied most American Jews that he is friendly toward Israel and committed to its security, polling shows. He is unlikely to see a defection of Jewish voters or even an appreciable drop in Jewish fundraising support, according to pollsters and political consultants.

For Republican candidates, though, the dust-up over Obama's Middle East peace plans presents a fresh opportunity of a different sort. Portraying Obama as a fickle friend of Israel is a way to gain ground in primary races dominated by vocal, pro-Israel conservative voters.

[golfguru]

1. Jews are not going to become conservative

just because of 1 Obama speech on Israel.

[classysassy]

2. I wonder how many lives have been lost

because of our support for Israel no matter what they do?

[Behind the Aegis]

3. .

[here_is_to_hope]

8. lmao... n/t

[Behind the Aegis]

9. don't lose your head. n/t

[here_is_to_hope]

17. sig line... lol.....n/t

[SoDesuKa]

4. Big Dogs and Little Dogs

By lecturing Obama, Netanyahu is striking a pose in front of the home crowd. It won't have much effect on global realities because America is a big country and Israel is a little country. In fact, the more Netanyahu yaps, the more he resembles a Yorkshire terrier.

Before six months go by, Netanyahu will sound a lot less combative. It is not in Israel's interest to mouth off to the U.S. president.

[joshcryer]

5. Any predictions on what he'll say? Any live stream for it also?

[Exilednight]

6. The president has a chance in September to back his words up with actions. In September, the

UN security council will take up a vote by the Palestinians to return Palestine to pre 1967 borders, the only thing that can possibly stop them from succeeding is a veto by the United States.

The question is, will Obama fold his position as outlined by his speech on Thursday? Or will he hold resolute and have us vote in favor of the 1967 borders?

[oberliner]

11. Obama is not in favor of the 1967 borders and opposes a Palestinian statehood declaration at the UN

He has made both of these points abundantly clear.

[Exilednight]

16. If the US is willing to support the 1967 borders, it will drive the Israelis to the

bargaining table beforehand and allow both sides to draw up new borders and cut off the UN vote all together.

[former9thward]

14. The UN vote is in the General Assembly not the Security Council.

The U.S. has no veto power there and the resolution is non-binding.

[Exilednight]

15. The first vote is in the UN security council. It's anticipated that the US will veto the

security council resolution. Once the resolution in the UNSC is vetoed, the Palestinians are then allowed to move to the General Assembly.

[oberliner]

19. I'm sorry but you have no idea what you are talking about here

The Palestinians are taking the issue directly to the General Assembly when they hold their annual meeting in September.

[Exilednight]

20. The first vote goes to the Security Council first. It's mandatory before the GA vote. n/t

[oberliner]

21. Not true

They will introduce a General Assembly resolution first.

No Security Council action of any kind is mandatory before such a vote.

You just have inaccurate information here.

[DCBob]

22. Correct and here's more..

An effort is underway at the U.N. to garner support for a General Assembly vote in favor of Palestinian membership. Supporters would have to find a two-thirds' majority of the 193 votes in the General Assembly to prevail.

The plan is to then invoke General Assembly Resolution 377 A (V), which was given the title "Uniting for Peace." Passed in 1950, according to the U.N. treaty documents, it "states that where the Security Council, because of lack of unanimity of the permanent members, fails to exercise its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, the General Assembly shall seize itself of the matter." That basically means that the U.N. General Assembly would bypass the U.N. Security Council.

Now, the wording is such that it does not have the force of international law. But there is a reason why Israel's Defense Minister Ehud Barak, referring to the U.N. movement to vote for recognition of a Palestinian state with the 1967 borders, said in March, "We stand to face a diplomatic tsunami." Needless to say, Israel is trying to fend off the vote, and the White House and the U.S. Mission to the U.N. have been supportive. But the plan for the vote is still moving forward.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20064778-503544.html

This could get messy.. which is why the President is trying to coax Israel and the Palentinians back to the negotiations table to fend this off. Netanyahu clearly doesnt get it or simply doesnt want to get it.

[Exilednight]

23. The US delegation has to impose the veto in the SC before the GA. Otherwise,

Palestine could get the desired outcome from the SC by, and I forget which it is, but it's either 2/3 or 3/4 vote on the SC. The GA requires 2/3rds to pass, but the GA is a much larger body.

[DCBob]

24. Not sure if the SC vote is mandatory.. but it really does not matter.. it's a mute point..

since we all know US will veto it. The GA vote is the biggie and might cause some diplomatic havoc.

[Exilednight]

25. France is signaling that they might vote for Palestine in the GA vote. n/t

[DCBob]

7. I think the President in on a mission now to make this happen.

Obama has major cred now after taking out OBL and the GOP sounds foolish and weak defending the same old Israeli line.

[treestar]

10. It is odd to hear right wing Christian Patriots

talking this way about Israel, almost as if they have equal loyalty to Israel.

[oberliner]

12. They oppose everything Obama says and does

Look at their reaction to the OBL killing.

[geek tragedy]

13. Bibi is calling the shots, not Obama.

When Biden went to Jerusalem, Bibi & Company humiliated him by announcing new illegal settlements.

Then Bibi comes to Washington, lies about our President, insults him, and gets rewarded with unconditional love from both parties in Congress.

He knows Congress won't let Obama stop the aid, and that the Israel Lobby won't let him do anything that Israel doesn't like at the UN.

So, why should he give a shit what Obama does or says?

[davidpdx]

18. I have to also wonder if it's a backhanded slap at Obama to make him look like a scary guy

who supports terrorists. She trying to replay what the Republicans attempted to do in 2008 and failed.

[bindelh]

26. With out even reading the replies to this 'Non Subject'

Palistein should be given Iraq as a homeland and let Isreal keep what she has won 'fair n square'.

:)