Netanyahu on Palestinian State ; Monday : "Hell non !" , Friday : "Yes, off course !!"

Netanyahu on Palestinian State ; Monday : "Hell non !" , Friday : "Yes, off course !!"

On March 16th -a day before the israeli election- Netanyahu promised the Israeli people that, as long as he will be the Prime Minister of Israel there won't be a palestinian state.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...tanyahu-losing-opinion-polls-as-voting-begins

5 days later, on March 21st, he backpedaled, on air, that he supports a two-state solution


Netanyahu backs off from pre-election stance ruling out Palestinian state


Israeli prime minister rows back on pre-election comments
PLO has plans to end security ties with Israel, chief Palestinian negotiator says


Binyamin Netanyahu has attempted to row back on his declaration that he would not allow the creation of a Palestinian state, amid mounting international criticism of comments made before his decisive election victory on Tuesday.

In his first interview since the vote, Netanyahu said: “I don’t want a one-state solution. I want a sustainable, peaceful two-state solution. But for that, circumstances have to change.”

Speaking to MSNBC, Netanyahu denied that he had retreated from his comments on Monday, when he unequivocally ruled out the establishment of a Palestinian state.

“I haven’t changed my policy,” he said. “What has changed is the reality.”

The embarrassing retreat came as the White House hinted that the US could stop protecting Israel at the UN and international institutions if it was not committed to a two-state solution – a key long-term policy in Washington. Officials have also suggested that the US might back a UN resolution recognising a Palestinian state.

White House spokesman Josh Earnest warned that the foundation for its policy for supporting Israel had been “eroded”.

“Steps that the United States has taken at the United Nations had been predicated on this idea that the two-state solution is the best outcome,” he said.

“Now our ally in these talks has said that they are no longer committed to that solution. That means we need to re-evaluate our position in this matter, and that is what we will do moving forward.”

Netanyahu’s post-election interview came as he intensified efforts to put together a new rightwing Israeli coalition government involving his far-right ally Naftali Bennett of the pro-settlement Jewish Home and ultra-orthodox religious parties.

Meanwhile, a key Palestinian figure, Saeb Erekat, said that the executive committee of the Palestine Liberation Organisation had instructed officials to begin work on ending security cooperation with Israel, one of the key underpinnings of the Oslo Peace Accords.

In the interview, Netanyahu implied he remained open to the possibility of new peace talks, saying Israel would “need the recognition of (a) Jewish state and real security in order to have a realistic two-state solution”.


But his comments are unlikely to cut much ice with Obama administration officials who largely blame him for undermining the Middle East peace process, not least through his policy of settlement building in the occupied Palestinian territories.

Speaking shortly after Netanyahu’s interview, Earnest issued a blunt rebuke for the prime minister.

“What is apparent is that in the context of the campaign and while he was the sitting prime minister of Israel, he walked back from commitments that Israel had previously made to a two-state solution,” Earnest said.

He also repeated a denunciation of Netanyahu’s “cynical, divisive election-day tactics”.

Obama’s press secretary again condemned the prime ministers’s attempt to rally support with incendiary remarks about a high turnout among Israeli Arab voters. Netanyahu used a 28-second video on election day to warn that Israeli Arabs were being bussed to the polls “in droves”.

In the MSNBC interview, Netanyahu dismissed allegations he was racist. “I’m not,” he said.

In an apparent attempt to mend relations with Washington – already badly damaged by his decision to accept a Republican invitation to address Congress earlier this month – Netanyahu said that Israel has “no greater ally” that the US.

“There are so many areas where we must work together with the United States,” Netanyahu said in an interview with NBC. “America has no greater ally than Israel, and Israel has no greater ally than the United States.”

“We have to consult each other, not have fiats or unilateral imposition, but negotiated peace with our neighbours and support between allies.”

Netanyahu’s invitation to Congress by John Boehner, the Republican speaker of the House of Representatives, was seen by many as a partisan stunt designed to embarrass the White House, but the Israeli prime minister insisted that he had not intended “any attempt at partisanship or any disrespect”.

The significance of Netanyahu’s remarks ahead of the elections was picked up by Erekat, the chief Palestinian negotiator, speaking to journalists after a meeting of the Palestine Liberation Organisation’s executive committee.

That meeting asked senior officials to examine how to implement the decision of a lower council and how to end security cooperation with Israel, who said that Netanyahu’s comments on a Palestinian state only confirmed what Palestinians already know.

After the meeting, Erekat told reporters on Thursday that the Palestinians are already working on plans to halt the security ties which would be complete within two weeks. Pressed by reporters on whether the long-threatened step would actually be implemented Erekat insisted: “I can assure you that something will happen.”
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/19/binyamin-netanyahu-israel-palestine-two-state-solution


Now here's the $1.000.000.000 question : Did he lied,
A) On Monday, to be elected ?
B) On Friday, to reassure foreign country leaders aannd public opinion ?

I think he spoke his mind on Monday when he promised there won't be a palestinian state on his watch. To his voters he can't afford to lie on such an important issues, especially considering he's right-wing allies he's gonna make the coalition with.
But to a US news anchor and audience, he can say whatever he wants without any consequences.

He's not flip-flopping, he's just telling what people wanna hear him tell, even if it means telling one thing and then the exact opposite of what he just said.
He's lying 'cause he's shitting his pants over the idea that the US government may not support Israel as unconditionally as they've done 'til today if he makes clear that he would do anything to prevent the establshment of a palestinian state.
 
Re: Netanyahu on Palestinian State ; Monday : "Hell non !" , Friday : "Yes, off course !!"

He did what every GOP candidate does: run far right to appease the base and then tack back to the center. That's what every GOP presidential hopeful is doing right now in Iowa. That's the playbook
 
Re: Netanyahu on Palestinian State ; Monday : "Hell non !" , Friday : "Yes, off course !!"

He did what every GOP candidate does: run far right to appease the base and then tack back to the center. That's what every GOP presidential hopeful is doing right now in Iowa. That's the playbook

Isn't that what politicians do in general?
 
Re: Netanyahu on Palestinian State ; Monday : "Hell non !" , Friday : "Yes, off course !!"

Isn't that what politicians do in general?

No just the GOP. I mean this as a compliment. Let me explain. Conservatives know how to create a message and then drive it home. Doesn't matter if it's wrong or misleading, they stick with their convictions. Democrats on the other hand are too weak kneed to do that. Instead of sticking with their convictions, they shy away from them especially if the polls aren't in their favor. A good case of this would be the 2014 midterms
 
Re: Netanyahu on Palestinian State ; Monday : "Hell non !" , Friday : "Yes, off course !!"

He did what every GOP candidate does: run far right to appease the base and then tack back to the center. That's what every GOP presidential hopeful is doing right now in Iowa. That's the playbook

1) To win the election, Netanyahu don't need to take back center. The right-wing base he's got is enought for him to win.
2) Netanyahu has proven he does not run far-right : He IS far-right. That's his policy, the policy he has conducted since he's in office, the policy he will continue to conduct as long as he will be in office. Netanyahu is not Jeb Bush or Mitt Romney ; he's Rick Perrry or Ted Cruz
3) Theplaybook you're talking about didn't brought victory to Mitt Romney, let's see it it will bring victory to the GOP candidate on 2016
 

Supafly

Logged Off 4 Freedom of Speech Restrictions
Bronze Member
Re: Netanyahu on Palestinian State ; Monday : "Hell non !" , Friday : "Yes, off course !!"

I think he caught wind of the new way of White House stance on handing over money and support for Israel, from "No matter what!" to "You keep on fucking things up, there are going to be consequences"
 
Re: Netanyahu on Palestinian State ; Monday : "Hell non !" , Friday : "Yes, off course !!"

No just the GOP. I mean this as a compliment. Let me explain. Conservatives know how to create a message and then drive it home. Doesn't matter if it's wrong or misleading, they stick with their convictions. Democrats on the other hand are too weak kneed to do that. Instead of sticking with their convictions, they shy away from them especially if the polls aren't in their favor. A good case of this would be the 2014 midterms


I meant politicians in general saying things they don't mean or going back on what they've said to get elected. That's gotta be universal and time-honored since politicians were speaking Sumerian.
 
Re: Netanyahu on Palestinian State ; Monday : "Hell non !" , Friday : "Yes, off course !!"

Yahoo is going to do what Yahoo wants. The only thing he cares about is Israel. I wouldn't trust anything other than that. He is a tough guy and has front line experience.
I would still take dealing with Yahoo over Iran. Iran is already in somewhat of a ********* of the NPT. So, while the 47 Republicans went off the track and the Iranian corrected them, he left out the fact that Iran is in ********* of a previously signed agreement. Making him either ignorant or a hypocrite. He seems like a fairly knowledgeable guy to me.

We should understand the players. Not ***** and wish and fall into the propaganda from the Republicans and Democrats.

With that said, If you kind folks would vote for me to be your president there is no way in heck that I would negotiate with Iran unless they came to the table in compliance with their existing treaty obligations.

I seem to remember a guy name Chamberlain negotiating with someone who was in ********* of treaty agreements.

As people who are far more hip than I am say....Just sayin'.
 

Supafly

Logged Off 4 Freedom of Speech Restrictions
Bronze Member
Re: Netanyahu on Palestinian State ; Monday : "Hell non !" , Friday : "Yes, off course !!"

You mention Chamberlain and ask Iran to come forward and be honest, yet no word about Israel denying ANY word or regulation on their nukes?

If Israel comes forward, they can start running their mouth about others.

We should understand the players alright.
 
Re: Netanyahu on Palestinian State ; Monday : "Hell non !" , Friday : "Yes, off course !!"

You mention Chamberlain and ask Iran to come forward and be honest, yet no word about Israel denying ANY word or regulation on their nukes?

If Israel comes forward, they can start running their mouth about others.

We should understand the players alright.

You aren't going to equate Israel (or the UK or France) having nukes with Iran having them right? You seriously don't get the distinction?
 
Re: Netanyahu on Palestinian State ; Monday : "Hell non !" , Friday : "Yes, off course !!"

Here's why there will never be a "two-state solution" - the palestinians will never allow it. It doesn't matter if Netanyahu or Barbra Streisand is PM.

Palestinian support for a two-state solution with Israel has dropped to below the 30 percent mark, according to a new poll commissioned by the US-based think tank the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, though most respondents said they were opposed to violent resistance.


Marking a notable shift in Palestinian public opinion, 60 percent of the population surveyed in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip (55% and 68%, respectively) said that the five-year goal “should be to work toward reclaiming all of historic Palestine, from the river to the sea,” according to the poll, a position meaning the elimination of Israel. Meanwhile, less than 30% (31% in the West Bank, 22% in Gaza) would like to “end the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza to achieve a two-state solution.”

In contrast, 53% of Palestinians supported the two-state solution in a December 2013 poll conducted by the Hebrew University.

Numerous other statistics from the survey confirmed the downward trend of support for a two-state solution as an end to the conflict. Two-thirds of respondents said that a two-state solution would be “part of a ‘program of stages,’ to liberate all of historic Palestine later” and that “resistance should continue until all of historic Palestine is liberated.”

http://www.timesofisrael.com/poll-palestinians-backing-2-states-become-minority/


Can we be honest here? There is one side in this conflict who historically just wants peace with it's neighbors and at the very least just want to be left alone, i.e., not ******.
Then there's the other side who is not satisfied until Israel is no longer, with a two-state solution being just a stepping stone.
 
Re: Netanyahu on Palestinian State ; Monday : "Hell non !" , Friday : "Yes, off course !!"

Remember, it was the palestinians and arab states who rejected the U.N. Partition plan in 1947 that led to the creation of the state of Israel. Immediately after Israel declared it's statehood in 1948, the combined armies of Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Iraq attacked with it's goal to eradicate the fledgling state of Israel and push every jew into the sea. Instead, they lost and Israel ended up with even more territory.

Losing wars, and in particular the ones you start, has consequences.
 
Re: Netanyahu on Palestinian State ; Monday : "Hell non !" , Friday : "Yes, off course !!"

Here's why there will never be a "two-state solution" - the palestinians will never allow it. It doesn't matter if Netanyahu or Barbra Streisand is PM.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/poll-palestinians-backing-2-states-become-minority/

Can we be honest here? There is one side in this conflict who historically just wants peace with it's neighbors and at the very least just want to be left alone, i.e., not ******.
Then there's the other side who is not satisfied until Israel is no longer, with a two-state solution being just a stepping stone.

Reember when things were in the hands of Yithzak Rabbin and Yasser Arafat ? That's the closest ot peace the region has ever ben. As a matter of fact, Rabbin it wasn't ****** by a palestinian terrorist ; He was ****** by an israeli nationalist.

An eye for an eye. The more Israel and their governments will oppose a two-state solution, the more palestinians and their leaders will rely on terrorism rather than negociations.



Remember, it was the palestinians and arab states who rejected the U.N. Partition plan in 1947 that led to the creation of the state of Israel. Immediately after Israel declared it's statehood in 1948, the combined armies of Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Iraq attacked with it's goal to eradicate the fledgling state of Israel and push every jew into the sea. Instead, they lost and Israel ended up with even more territory.

Losing wars, and in particular the ones you start, has consequences.
You do realise you're refering to things that took place 68 years ago, do you ?
You do know that the occupation of the Golan Heigths by Israel is a ********* of United Nations Security Council Resolution 242, do you ?

Israel likes ot paint itself as some kind of lone beacon of freedom and democracy in a region of tyranny and barbarism. May they provethat they are better than those who surround them, may they make the first move towards peace and may it be a significant move. Stopping the settlements on the Golan Heights, the Gaza Strip and the Sinaï would be a significant move. But Netanyahu doesn't to stop the settlements, he encourages them.

When he says "No palestinian state on my watch, Netanyahu's no better than the Iranians ayatollah's who have swarn to destroy the state of Israel.
 

Little Red Wagon Repairman

Girls Can't Wrestle
Re: Netanyahu on Palestinian State ; Monday : "Hell non !" , Friday : "Yes, off course !!"

Interesting read on the 2 Israels, right and left...

http://news.yahoo.com/liberal-israelis-netanyahus-win-reality-check-115401998.html


For liberal Israelis, Netanyahu's win is a reality check
Associated Press
By DANIEL ESTRIN 5 hours ago


TEL AVIV, Israel (AP) — Israeli liberals woke up after national elections with a demoralizing feeling: Most of the country, in a deep and possibly irreversible way, does not think like they do.

There had been a sense of urgency among moderate Israelis, and even an ounce of hope, that widespread frustration with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's six straight years in office would lead voters to pull Israel away from what they perceive as its rightward march toward international isolation, economic inequality and a dead end for peace with the Palestinians.

But as the results trickled in on Wednesday, they showed Likud with a shocking lead that has all but guaranteed Netanyahu a third consecutive term. Netanyahu called it a victory "against all odds." The liberals' optimism has been replaced with despair — and an infuriating belief that the masses may never understand that logic shows the current path is suicidal.

"***** cyanide, ****** Neanderthals. You won," award-winning Israeli author and actress Alona Kimhi wrote on her Facebook page, before erasing it as her comments became the talk of the town. "Only death will save you from yourselves."

Such rage rippled through liberal Israel this week. Social media was full of embittered Israelis accusing Netanyahu's supporters of racism, and some vowed to stop donating charity to the underprivileged whom they perceived as being automatic supporters of the right.

The prime minister's main rival denounced such attacks. "Attempts to divide, vilify and spread **** in Israeli society disgust me, and it doesn't matter whether it comes from the right or the left," wrote Zionist Union leader Isaac Herzog on Facebook.

The anger was about far more than the election, reflecting a larger and more dramatic battle for the heart of the country.

Israel's founding fathers were Jews of Ashkenazi, or eastern European, descent and the ideological predecessors of the Labor party, the main faction in the rebranded Zionist Union. The left led the country for its first three decades until Likud — heavily backed by working class Jews of Mizrahi, or Middle Eastern, descent — gained power in 1977.

The Labor Party returned to power in the 1990s, leading the first efforts at peace with the Palestinians. But the Palestinian uprising in the early 2000s saw the return of hawkish rule, which in one form or another has lasted until today.

The divisions between right and left largely revolve around the question of what do with territories captured by Israel in the 1967 Mideast war — and the millions of Palestinians who live there.

Parties on the left would trade the land for peace and allow the creation of a Palestinian state. They also argue that the lands are a liability, since incorporating the Palestinians as citizens would destroy Israel as a Jewish-majority state.

The right emphasizes the lands' strategic value and biblical symbolism and pushes constantly for settling them with Jews. Its success in this endeavor has, paradoxically, put the country on a path toward being a place where Jews may no longer be a strong majority.

With more than 550,000 Israeli settlers now living in territories claimed by the Palestinians, Israeli liberals — along with the Palestinians — believe time is running out for the "two-state solution." So compelling is this "demographic argument" that Netanyahu himself has adopted its language, claiming at various times since 2009 that he, too, wants to end the occupation; but his party opposes this and Netanyahu continues to support the settlements, leading opponents to believe he is bamboozling them and adding to the sense of urgency.

Activists at the headquarters of V-15, an initiative that called to unseat Netanyahu, silently bundled dozens of banners on Thursday, and one activist asked a journalist to leave. A whole floor of the Zionist Union's campaign headquarters was empty, and party leaders gazed up from crumpled posters next to a vacuum cleaner.

"It's a big disappointment. There was a lot of energy for change here," said Zev Laderman, an investor in start-up companies, sitting in a boulevard cafe. "I woke up this morning to realize that I'm a minority in this country."

The center-left's Zionist Union won 24 seats — somewhat higher than the combined previous total of the two parties that form it — but Likud won 30. Another 37 seats were captured by parties believed to be willing to support Likud for a solid majority in the 120-member parliament. And the left-wing Meretz party will now be the smallest party in the upcoming government.

The looming coalition likely will feature right-wing pro-settler and ultra-Orthodox Jewish religious parties. In fundamental ways, they represent the opposite of the defiantly secular Israeli liberals who are fed up with taxpayer money being pumped to West Bank Jewish settlements and ultra-Orthodox Jewish communities.

The prime minister's sudden turnaround toward victory took place after an 11th-hour effort to appeal to nationalist Israelis by pledging not to support an independent Palestinian state, and by warning voters of Arab citizens being bused to the polls in "droves" by left-wing organizations — comments that drew rebukes from Israeli Arabs and the White House.

Netanyahu since has tried to contain the damage from his statements — saying he remains committed to Palestinian statehood if conditions throughout the region improve — and insisting he is not a racist. But it seems unlikely that peace negotiations with the Palestinians will be high on his agenda. And the Jewish settlement of the West Bank, which enrages liberal Israelis and cements the country's entanglement there, likely will march on.

Liberal voters perceived this week's defeat less as the result of a poorly fought campaign than as a reflection of demographic trends and genuine public opinion in the country of 8 million.

After years of failed peace efforts, including two Israeli offers for statehood that were rejected or ignored by the Palestinians, few think a deal is likely. Even the Zionist Union seemed to hide from the issue during the campaign, focusing instead on bread-and-butter issues like the country's high cost of living.

"It doesn't matter what kind of campaign (the left) ran," political blogger Tal Schneider said. "There is a reality in the field. You can't change it. It's a nationalist public that is afraid of the Arabs."

Sitting at a bustling cafe in a hipster neighborhood of Tel Aviv, a 26-year-old campaign activist for the Zionist Union broke down in tears about the party's defeat.

"It's devastating," activist Lior Shalish said. She said the election results shouldn't be a surprise, just months after left-wing Israelis were attacked on the streets of Tel Aviv by nationalists during Israel's war against Hamas militants.

"You don't get a left-wing government after that. Like, that doesn't change so quickly," Shalish said. "We were stupid to believe that it does."

Some liberal Israelis said there were rays of light: A joint list unifying various Arab parties emerged as the country's third-largest party, re-energizing a disaffected Israeli Arab minority, and the V-15 initiative claims it increased turnout by centrist and left-wing voters.

In the lead up to the election, the left's momentum reached its peak at a major rally this month, when tens of thousands of Israelis packed a Tel Aviv square demanding a change of government.

The rally was seen as a victory. Many focused on the keynote speech by Meir Dagan, a former head of the Mossad intelligence agency, who issued an emotional appeal for change.

But in retrospect, it seems a tipping point in favor of Netanyahu occurred when artist Yair Garbuz took to the podium and railed against the "amulet kissers" who support Netanyahu.

His comments were perceived as a condescending swipe at the country's conservative working class of religious Jews of Sephardi, or Middle Eastern, lineage who have longstanding gripes with the country's European-descended Ashkenazi elite and lean heavily toward Likud.

The day after elections, columnist Ben Caspit wrote an article in the Maariv daily newspaper titled "Two States." He was not referring to the left's two-state solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but to Israel's own cultural divide.

"Israel is split — between left and right, between Bibi and anti-Bibi, between aspirations for normalcy and aspirations for territory," Caspit wrote, using Netanyahu's nickname. "Two states, two styles, two world views, split once again."

___

Follow Daniel Estrin at www.twitter.com/danielestrin.
 
Re: Netanyahu on Palestinian State ; Monday : "Hell non !" , Friday : "Yes, off course !!"

You do realise you're refering to things that took place 68 years ago, do you ?
You do know that the occupation of the Golan Heigths by Israel is a ********* of United Nations Security Council Resolution 242, do you ?

So Israel should hand over the Golan Heights back to Syria and in this case so Iranian or ISIS ****** can rain down fire in Israeli towns? That's stupid, and again, when you lose wars there are consequences. And in this case you lose the high ground, literally.

Israel likes ot paint itself as some kind of lone beacon of freedom and democracy in a region of tyranny and barbarism.

And they're not? In relation to whom in that region?

May they provethat they are better than those who surround them, may they make the first move towards peace and may it be a significant move. Stopping the settlements on the Golan Heights, the Gaza Strip and the Sinaï would be a significant move. But Netanyahu doesn't to stop the settlements, he encourages them.

There are no Israeli settlements in Gaza. Israel completely withdrew from Gaza in 2005, and to reciprocate, the palestinians in Gaza launched constant rocket attacks into Israel.

Also, Israel gave back the Sinai to Egypt in 1979. There are no settlements there nor have been for decades. Where are you getting your information from?


When he says "No palestinian state on my watch, Netanyahu's no better than the Iranians ayatollah's who have swarn to destroy the state of Israel.

Of all the things you have posted in this forum, this is (by far) the most asinine, even including the why can't American *************** officers aim to shoot the weapons out of perps' hands instead of shooting to ****.
 
Re: Netanyahu on Palestinian State ; Monday : "Hell non !" , Friday : "Yes, off course !!"

So Israel should hand over the Golan Heights back to Syria and in this case so Iranian or ISIS ****** can rain down fire in Israeli towns? That's stupid, and again, when you lose wars there are consequences. And in this case you lose the high ground, literally.

And they're not? In relation to whom in that region?

There are no Israeli settlements in Gaza. Israel completely withdrew from Gaza in 2005, and to reciprocate, the palestinians in Gaza launched constant rocket attacks into Israel.

Also, Israel gave back the Sinai to Egypt in 1979. There are no settlements there nor have been for decades. Where are you getting your information from?

Of all the things you have posted in this forum, this is (by far) the most asinine, even including the why can't American *************** officers aim to shoot the weapons out of perps' hands instead of shooting to ****.
Johan is posting asinine statements in politics because I think that he is more or less conditioned by the left wing media to and he takes their information as genuine even if they are plain bs. His sources are mostly left wing and therefore not really credible ones. For him Israel must give everything it has won and one mustn't forget that it was the Arabs who attacked Israel in 1956, 1967 and 1973. Israel has nothing to give to a state lead by radicals and who is conducting deliberate ******* and attacks on Israeli civilians. Teheran is a real threat, Israel isn't. I think in the US too , you have those who adore O and those who dislike him. But Israel has always been on the edge and threatened by wars and attacks every day, so I am not astonished that some people voted for Nathanyahu. Not to mention that Bibi's ******* was the famous colonel Yehonathan Natanyahu who died in the famous Entebbe raid in 1976.
 
Re: Netanyahu on Palestinian State ; Monday : "Hell non !" , Friday : "Yes, off course !!"

Johan is posting asinine statements in politics because I think that he is more or less conditioned by the left wing media to and he takes their information as genuine even if they are plain bs. His sources are mostly left wing and therefore not really credible ones. For him Israel must give everything it has won and one mustn't forget that it was the Arabs who attacked Israel in 1956, 1967 and 1973. Israel has nothing to give to a state lead by radicals and who is conducting deliberate ******* and attacks on Israeli civilians. Teheran is a real threat, Israel isn't. I think in the US too , you have those who adore O and those who dislike him. But Israel has always been on the edge and threatened by wars and attacks every day, so I am not astonished that some people voted for Nathanyahu. Not to mention that Bibi's ******* was the famous colonel Yehonathan Natanyahu who died in the famous Entebbe raid in 1976.


"Teheran is a real threat, Israel isn't" Bravo, Georges.

I've said I followed Benjamin Netanyahu since his first stint as Israeli PM but it was the Netanyahu name that raised an eyebrow with me. His ******* led and was the only military casualty in the famed raid on Entebbe which by modern-day military standards was the most daring raid ever pulled off. (read it or watch the movie).
 
Re: Netanyahu on Palestinian State ; Monday : "Hell non !" , Friday : "Yes, off course !!"

You mention Chamberlain and ask Iran to come forward and be honest, yet no word about Israel denying ANY word or regulation on their nukes?

That is correct. You read well.

We should understand the players alright.
If Israel comes forward, they can start running their mouth about others.

I was not flattering Israel. I called their Prime Minister "Yahoo". I did say that they only act on their own interest. That isn't exactly trustworthy. However, I do not believe that they have as a stated policy to eliminate any other nation and I do not believe they are supporting terrorists. So, yes, we should understand the players.

You're allowed your opinion in Germany. You don't get to vote for me for president, so...I can't pander to you sorry. :)

Just teasing Super, but it is a tough situation and I personally wouldn't let Israel dictate my foreign policy and I wouldn't negotiate with Iran as an equal. They haven't earned that right yet.

There isn't a solution that will make everyone happy. I'll go with mine. You will go with yours.
 
Re: Netanyahu on Palestinian State ; Monday : "Hell non !" , Friday : "Yes, off course !!"

Isn't that what politicians do in general?
"If you like your plan you can keep it"

"I believe the definition of marriage is between a man and a woman"
 

Mr. Daystar

In a bell tower, watching you through cross hairs.
Top