30-day Obama ultimatum to Israel

Discussion is locked
Reply to: 30-day Obama ultimatum to Israel
PLEASE NOTE: Do not post advertisements, offensive materials, profanity, or personal attacks. Please remember to be considerate of other members. If you are new to the CNET Forums, please read our CNET Forums FAQ. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Reporting: 30-day Obama ultimatum to Israel
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
- Collapse -
Did you even read that article, Toni?

The only reference I saw to 30 days was:

The Arab League on Saturday gave the Obama administration 30 days to
pressure Israel into reviewing the recently-expired 10-month building
freeze as a condition for the return to direct talks on establishing the
Palestinian Authority as a sovereign state on land restored to Israel
in the Six-Day War in 1967.

I don't see where Obama gave anyone an ultimatum on anything.

- Collapse -
If he had to get permission

from the Arab League to get in the Libya mess, do you honestly think he isn't already giving that deadline? Wait for the media to catch up with BO when he returns from's going to be news in the next 48 hours.

- Collapse -
Nice tap dance

Now show me where he gave anyone an ultimatum.

- Collapse -
I think you're assuming too much Tony, going from making a

presentation to the Arab League regarding intervention in Libya, and assuming the Arab League now runs the State Department. The presentation was successful and the Arab League agreed, but I doubt the US would have stayed out had they forbidden us.

- Collapse -
Mark Levin said it best.........
- Collapse -
(NT) OK, what does that prove?
- Collapse -
And he's a neutral voice because ...?

Somehow I recall members of the Democratic side opposing Bush, Damn who was that Representative? from Ohio that put everybody here at SE's backs up when he said negative things about Bush policy in Iraq.

- Collapse -
Has Obama replied at all in regard to this?

I really don't know, but I've not seen nor heard of it. I don't think he's bound himself by default to anything or everything some Arab League or group proposes.

- Collapse -
I expect some type of response

today or tomorrow at the latest. If he gives Israel that 30 days to get the Israeli/Palestinian peace talks settled and give the land back as part of that deal(which will never happen since they haven't settled anything in over 50 years already so 30 days won't mean much), then he's basically giving the okay to the Arab League to allow Israel's enemies to take the land back any way they see fit with the USA looking the other way because Obama has already stated publicly that he agrees with that border demand....if he doesn't give them the 30 days, Israel can expect to go to war anyhow because the Arab League will be given a silent nod by BO. The only stance BO can take that would be telling the Arab League he doesn't agree with those border demands now would be to reverse himself and state that if any country attacks Israel over it, they are also attacking America and we will fight with Israel.....can you see that happening?

- Collapse -
So now you acknowledge....

...that he hasn't actually done what you claimed he did in your original post.


- Collapse -
It's not going to happen.

No President, Democrat or Republican, Bush or Obama or whoever else, would pack themselves in a corner like that.


- Collapse -
Obama already has

backed himself into that corner....first by making the speech a few weeks ago telling Israel to go back to the 1967 borders...and now, using JP's link

Obama declared the U.S. commitment to Israel's security "unshakable,"
and said "every state has the right to self-defense, and Israel must be
able to defend itself -- by itself -- against any threat."

The operative words...BY ITSELF which is in direct opposition to the first part of the statement that the USA's "commitment to Israel is 'unshakeable'"

- Collapse -
Can the US make an unshakable "commitment"

without being involved in fighting?

Israel has no equal, in the mid-east, as far as weapons goes.

Israel doesn't release what weapons it possesses. US Government knows, you don't know, neither do I.

Who said this commitment involves US "fighting"? You did...I mean besides you.

- Collapse -
Wrong again

1. He never told them to go back to the 1967 borders. What he said was that those borders should be used as a starting point for negotiations.

2. Shouldn't Israel be able to defend itself by itself? Wouldn't that be a good thing? We can do it, why shouldn't they be able to?

- Collapse -
It makes no sense

to use our forces to support unknown rebels in Libya and then NOT commit our forces to assist a true ally. Israel 'should' be able to defend itself, but if push comes to shove and they are, indeed, engaged in a war, the USA should immediately volunteer to help out via our military. We should NOT have a president who says, in advance, that they need to defend themselves BY THEMSELVES.

- Collapse -
so now you say,

he's saying he won't help Israel?

- Collapse -
That's what I'm saying

because he said it himself..."Israel has the right to defend itself BY ITSELF"

- Collapse -
OK, so where did he say....

....we shouldn't help them if they need it? He didn't say they NEED to defend themselves by themselves; he said they should be able to. This entire thread is just you trying to put words in his mouth that he never said.

- Collapse -
Since when has Israel needed anyone to

fight for them? I don't remember anyone helping out during the 67 war with all the Arab nations against them.

I have a friend that used to sell to Israel and he said they tended to buy one and make all the rest they needed.

So I think Israel has been doing very well considering all the countries that would like to see them go away.


- Collapse -
(NT) fighting Libya IS helping Israel
- Collapse -
I won't be surprised if he says nothing

All considered, that might be his best move, to ignore it.

- Collapse -
I'd agree

It's sometimes better to ignore what might have been a controversial statement as doing otherwise often worsens matters. Too often I've seen politicians try to explain themselves only to find the hole getting deeper. The press will eventually go away if they're not fed.

- Collapse -
"our one true last ally" ? Nice try at misrepresentation.

Israel has been caught with active covert spying operations within the US government over and over again. Hardly the actions of our "last true ally".

- Collapse -
pardon me... I should have said raising the stakes by...

... entertaining discussions by all involved in the region.

- Collapse -
6 milion hits?
- Collapse -
(NT) Just don't google "santorum" (^_~)
- Collapse -
Hey, that is a fun game
- Collapse -
Biden and Israel visit March 12, 2010
- Collapse -
You snub me, I snub you?
You throw me under the bus The White House is upset with Netanyahu's recent decision to approve Jewish construction in east Jerusalem.

I throw you under the bus. The White House denied Netanyahu the red carpet treatment generally afforded to visiting heads of state.

CNET Forums