General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsObama’s Putin-Netanyahu Conundrum: When Is It Ok To Seize, Occupy Territory?
By Tod Robberson / Editorial Writer
1:59 pm on March 3, 2014
President Barack Obama met today with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as the two leaders cordially discussed the importance of earnest negotiations with the Palestinians regarding West Bank settlements and an eventual land-for-peace deal. Israel has occupied the West Bank militarily since seizing it by force in 1967. Israel has refused to budge, and the reality is that nothing will happen until the two sides negotiate a solution.
Just as they sat down to meet, Obama told reporters that Russia must understand that it cannot “with impunity” send its troops into neighboring territory — Ukraine — and occupy it against all international norms and laws. The United States is contemplating “a whole series of steps” — economic, diplomatic, etc. — to pressure Russia to leave.
The message to Russia, given the U.S. tolerance of Israeli military occupation and settlement of the West Bank for 47 years, is that this is really just a matter of negotiation. Stay put, don’t yield to any pressure. Send thousands of more Russians to occupy the Crimean Peninsula. Let them build houses. Use bulldozers to mow down Ukrainian houses. Perhaps the Russian military can even guard Russian settlers while they take land belonging to Ukrainians.
And maybe in 30 or 40 years, Russians and Ukrainians can negotiate some kind of deal.
This is the problem when the United States maintains an inconsistent foreign policy. The United States used military force when Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1990. The seizure of territory by military force was unacceptable and required a forceful U.S. and international response, Washington insisted.
more...
http://dallasmorningviewsblog.dallasnews.com/2014/03/obamas-putin-netanyahu-conundrum-when-is-it-ok-to-seize-occupy-territory.html/?nclick_check=1
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)So clearly there is a huge difference here between Vladimir and Benjamin.
2banon
(7,321 posts)
gordianot
(15,238 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)
malaise
(269,024 posts)policy. America and the West have no credibility after Iraq.
Fuck the hawks and the neo-cons.
cali
(114,904 posts)a very slanted and unfair pro-Israel policy that all Presidents have operated under.
idendoit
(505 posts)The Dallas news is a Koch rag.
cali
(114,904 posts)until Putin seized it and whether or not he was welcomed by much of the population doesn't change that Putin invaded a portion of another country.
and no, Russia did not control Crimea until Putin sent in the military.
I hate bullshit and propaganda no matter where it comes from.
idendoit
(505 posts)Constitution of Ukraine, 2004
Article 17 : The location of foreign military bases shall not be permitted on the territory of Ukraine.
Article 118
The executive power in oblasts, districts, and in the Cities of Kyiv and Sevastopol is exercised by local state administrations.
Particular aspects of the exercise of executive power in the Cities of Kyiv and Sevastopol are determined by special laws of Ukraine.
So who runs Sevastopol? The Russians have it leased until 2042. Is this different from Gitmo? If so how so?
cali
(114,904 posts)it's embarrassing to see stupid propaganda and revisionism no matter where it emanates from. Hate it. don't buy it. ever.
idendoit
(505 posts)That's old Soviet style, Comrade.
former9thward
(32,016 posts)It was given to Ukraine Republic from the Russian Republic by Khrushchev -- a Ukrainian in 1954. At time it did not mean anything since all the Republics were controlled by the Soviet Union.
cali
(114,904 posts)
Peregrine
(992 posts)Oh, yes. The Arabs attacked Israel. Wars have consequences. You lose, you lose land.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Let Russia invade and take whatever territory it wants to...because Bush.
This is the new progressive argument?
Down with war, up with invasion.
The President is trying to conduct foreign policy in a climate of misinformation and propaganda being pushed by the left and right.
JI7
(89,250 posts)when ISrael was first created and the years afterwards.
he is dealing with the situation as is now.
the hypocrites are actually those who do always attack israel but are now suddenly offended at any criticism of what russia does.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)Whatever Obama thinks and says is the right answer. Abdicating thought, opinion and all to Obama is exactly what should be done. If Obama later changes his mind? He *meant* to do that. He operates on a plane of existence much higher than other men and women.
Lest you think I am strictly an Obama partisan/PR/drone, I once opposed his choice of tie color, so there.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)
