Israel/Palestine
Related: About this forumNetanyahu to Obama: Arab states can have role in Palestinian-Israeli peace process
Netanyahu and Obama now meeting for first time in 7 months; Obama tells Netanyahu: Status quo in Gaza must change.By Barak Ravid | Oct. 1, 2014 | 8:38 PM
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told U.S. President Barack Obama during their White House meeting Wednesday that he wants to integrate Arab states in the peace process with the Palestinians. Obama told Netanyahu that the status quo between the two sides, in Gaza and the West Bank, must change in order to advance peace.
The meeting opened calmly, with both leaders apparently trying to convey positive messages. They thanked each other and lauded the cooperation between the two states.
"Prime Minister Netanyahu is no stranger to the White House," Obama said at the start of the meeting, adding that Netanyahu had been there more than any other foreign leader. "We meet at a challenging time," the U.S. president said. "Once again, we reaffirm the unbreakable bond between the U.S. and Israel and our Iron clad commitment to Israel's security."
Just over an hour was set aside for the meeting between the two relatively little compared to past meetings. The two leaders were not set to eat lunch together after the meeting, either. Obama's public schedule shows that he is booked for an intimate lunch with Vice President Joe Biden and Secretary of State John Kerry after Netanyahu leaves the White House.
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.618667
oberliner
(58,724 posts)That's Obama who said that. He'd probably be attacked here as a crazy RW Zionist extremist.
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)He should be attacked for continuing a policy that is immoral and contrary to the interests of US and the world. That doesn't make him a crazy RW Zionist extremist.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Is he not espousing views that would could be classified at the very least as being strongly Zionist?
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)Perhaps we have different understanding of the term. If you include the expansion of Israel into the West Bank as a product of Zionism, I don't think President Obama is endorsing that, at least not publicly.
Since Israel exists as a sovereign nation, support from the US isn't US support for Zionism per se. That bridge has been crossed.
Our obsequious, unquestioning, and unreciprocated support for Israel is a huge mistake for the United States, but that has nothing to do with Zionism, pro or con.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Affirming a strong bond with Israel is what Zionism means.
I'm not understanding what definition of the term you are going off of.
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)A strong bond with Israel is merely affirming Israel as an allied nation. The development of the Israeli state is not what Obama was talking about. Supporting the defense of Israel is not Zionism, per se. Supporting Israeli expansion in the West Bank would be Zionism, IMO.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)Zionism is the support of Israel as a Jewish state in Palestine. Nothing about expansion or development of Israel is intrinsic to the term.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)People who are not as much of a Zionist as Obama would argue that we should not be quite so supportive. That we should cut off funding and aid. That we should view Israel as a pariah nation, etc.
Zionists would argue that we should continue to support Israel and remain a staunch ally.
Obama is on the Zionist side of that debate.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)they need to repeat the same words over and over again....who needs so much reminding?
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Though, to be fair, it's the same sort of remark made when introducing the UK Prime Minister or another similarly close ally.