So Obama is willing to stretch out “the hand of friendship” to Iran, but he’s going to be more “forceful” with Israel.
Gen. James Jones, national security adviser to President Barack Obama, told a European foreign minister a week ago that unlike the Bush administration, Obama will be “forceful” with Israel.
Meanwhile, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel told an AIPAC conference last night that two states for two peoples is the only solution the United States is committed to.
Let’s stop and think. One of these countries funds Hamas and Hezbullah and has trained forces fighting against Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan. The other trains American troops in city fighting techniques for use in Iraq, passes along intelligence information about America’s enemies, gives America any help asked for and partners with American technology firms to help improve the world. By all means, then, let’s treat Israel like the enemy, and force her to negotiate with the Palestinians on the Palestinians’ terms, but let Iran dictate the terms of its negotiations with America.
Because that’s what makes the most sense. One nation is a reliable ally. The other is an enemy working against American interests. But hey, the “realists” all think that as the Palestinians go, so goes the Middle East—in spite of the fact that before 1967, all hands in the Middle East were against Israel. (They still are, mostly—there is just a cold peace in two bordering states.)
Yes, indeed. Smart power in the Age of Obama. You just can’t beat it.
And the Kurds are getting the same treatment vis-a-vis Iran.
Hafez Assad of Syria told Henry Kissinger in 1975: “You’ve betrayed Vietnam, someday you will sell out Taiwan and we’ll be around when you get tired (of) Israel.â€
I’m not certain to whom this statement should be attributed – I had heard it was Kissinger, but Kathryn Jean Lopez in NRO Online in 2007 attributes it to Assad. Her short essay deals with this problem of alliances with the US. Here’s the link:
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NTQwYmIwYmNmNTIxZjcyZmYwMTAxYWM4OTY1ODkyYTc=
I can think of two explanations. Take your pick:
1: He’s a coward. He’ll act tough to the country that he knows won’t try to blow up a US city, and coddle the ones that will.
2: He’s on the side of the terrorists.
Personally, I think both might be correct.
I don’t know about that David.
I think he’s so steeped in lefty ideology that he actually thinks that all the bad things
in the world are the fault of dead, white men and/or America. And the other lefty certainty,
if we could just talk to the our enemies, they would see the light.
To paraphrase Senator William Borah,
Lord, if only he could talk with Ahmadinejad, all this might be avoided.
Glenn Reynolds, over at Instapundit, has a good idea: Israel should go rogue. Then Obama would see it as a country to be appeased and placated, like Iran and North Korea, instead of an ally, to be pushed.