they're the only free democratic country

that is not what a real democratic society tolerates.

What other Middle Eastern country is more freer or more democratic?

Depending on the neighborhood, it might be true.

And they are the only free and democratic country in that neighborhood.

Some are more "free and democratic" than others.

The only democracy, a fact often forgotten on Democratic Underground

is one good reason.

to cut deals behind her back with John Boehner.

considered compulsory.

that said, yes she is worse than Obama by a considerable degree, but Netanyahu always overplays his hand.

and Hillary was at STATE for most of the time working on this issue. If you think Kerry just pull this out of his -$$ then you have'nt been following the how we got to here and now.

strained relations between itself and its indispensable patron.

Clinton is a sane Neocon.

In the end, US policy towards Israel/Palestine is largely irrelevant since all sides recognize we have no constructive role to play there and no real ability to influence the inevitable outcome.

Clinton will have pretty much the same Israel policy as any Republican would--100%, reflexive support for whatever Israel wants, and while barely pretending to support the two-state solution (which is dead anyways).

those favoring the one-state solution in the region will get their way regardless of who wins in 2016. Obama is the last American president to give a shit about the creation of a Palestinian state.

I don't understand why Hillary feels the need to embrace a GoP position.

bipartisan issues out there. It would be awful if it actually DID become partisan. Hillary will prevent that!

"Today I saw a picture of a weeping Palestinian man holding a plastic carrier bag of meat. It was his son. He'd been shredded (the hospital's word) by an Israeli missile attack - apparently using their fab new weapon, flechette bombs. You probably know what those are - hundreds of small steel darts packed around explosive which tear the flesh off humans. The boy was Mohammed Khalaf al-Nawasra. He was 4 years old."
http://stopwar.org.uk/news/today-i-saw-a-weeping-palestinian-man-holding-a-plastic-bag-of-meat-it-was-his-son



























c

Israel is far from being "the good guys" that the GoP makes them out to be.

Sometimes she seems so hopelessly lost in the last century.

months ago, as did all the Democratic candidates, much to the disappointment of Netanyahu , and the Likud party. The Middle East is destabilized enough thanks to the policies of the republicans and Netanyahu, and the Likud party.

I hope the republicans use this against the Democrats in the general election. The invasion of Iraq was a disaster, which coincidently, Netanyahu and the Likud party encouraged.

I do NOT buy the OPs view on Hillary or any of the Democratic candidates. Not one Democratic candidate, except maybe Jim Webb, agreed with Israel's position on the deal, nor did they think that Netanyahu campaigning for Romney in 2012 was a good thing.

Maybe we might get lucky, and Netanyahu will campaign for the republican nominee in 2016. Based on his record, the odds would favor us

If so, a reset with Israel would entail sanctions, threats, and worse. A fresh start! - that's a familiar cliche, too. Read, "A Clean Break" (1996) if you want to understand where HRC's Mideast strategy comes from, here: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1438.htm

So all this shit is her so called policy reset?

Making sure everyone knows she's a War Hawk?

None of her for me.

wrong on this issue. It was Netanyahu who started this bullshit, and created what you refer to as the strained relations between the two countries.

Netanyahu, who immersed himself in the U.S. elections in Florida campaigning for Romney. Who in the hell does he think he IS, that he has ANY business involving himself in U.S. elections, yet alone trying to influence American policy by speaking before OUR Congress just before HIS elections.

Netanyahu has done more damage to Israel than can be measured. Encouraging the invasion of Iraq was just one of the many disasters he was involved in. Cheney and Netanyahu make a real good pair.

Guess what, the Senate and House Democrats agree, because they effectively told Netanyahu that his interference in the Iran deal was NOT welcome, and that the vast majority of Democratic Senators and Congresspeople who are sympathetic to Israel, told him that in so many words and actions.

Most American Jews, including ME, supported President Obama's handling of the relations between the U.S. and Israel. In fact a good percentage of Israeli Jews, including those in security and the military believe it was a big mistake for Netanyahu to interfere in U.S. policy.

If you think your comment at the end of the article, implying that it is the fault of the President, why relations between Israel have soured, you are sadly mistaken. It was Israel's doing, specifically Netanyahu and the Likud party. Look at the record.

Your comment does NOTHING to help Hillary, and in fact your assumption that "Hillary would be a better friend toward Israel than Obama", not only is a SLUR against Hillary and Obama, but contradicts THE FACTS. Perhaps you have NOT been aware that Netanyahu has been against ANY deal with Iran, and after this was announced several months back, Hillary was one of the first to support the deal. I guess that means she wasn't a very good friend toward Israel either.

However, the fact is this, both Obama, and Hillary have the same stand toward Israel, as do the vast majority of Democrats, but NOT at the expense of what is best for the United States, and in actuality, the middle east.

You indicate that "strength on this issue won't become a partisan GOP talking point". What is the talking point? Netanyahu and the republicans wanted war with Iran. It worked out so well for them in Iraq. That ISN'T a talking point, that is a failure of American policy, causing a complete destabilization of the middle east, and disrupting the complete balance of power.

Terrorist acts, invasions and other violence used when not absolutely necessary beget still harsher acts of violence.

We might say that with Netanyahu, the Palestinians are reaping what they sowed in their many terrorist acts since the establishment of Israel.

Entebbe. A brutal, pointless act of terror.

It's time for both sides to negotiate a settlement.


And we can learn from the experience of the Palestinians.

Blowback is a terrible thing. The wrath that acts of terror and invasions justify in the minds of the victims is something we do not need on this earth.

became president, and decided that the U.S. should no longer be involved in negotiating a settlement between Israel and the Palestinians. When Bill Clinton left office, he was in the middle of negotiations between the Israel and the Palestinians, and the bush administration instead of continuing where Bill Clinton left off, broke off what Clinton had started. The bush administration also sabotaged the Sunshine policy, again, left by Bill Clinton for the next administration to continue, but the policy of the bush administration was confrontation NOT diplomacy:

The South Korean leader had gone to Washington to urge President Bush to quickly pursue talks started by the Clinton administration aimed at normalizing relations with North Korea and ending the impoverished communist state's missile program in exchange for economic assistance. But President Kim found the Bush administration skeptical of the Clinton approach — and by implication, of South Korea's own efforts at reconciliation. In particular, the Bush team was anxious to reopen negotiations over the 1994 agreement between North Korea and Japan, South Korea and the U.S. to provide energy assistance in exchange for the dismantling of North Korea's nuclear program — an option President Kim warned would not be accepted by the North Koreans. But President Bush stated outright that he was skeptical of agreements reached with a regime as secretive as Pyongyang's.

http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,102402,00.html

For all the faults of the Clinton administration, they tried to address the Middle East problems and North/South Korea issues diplomatically. All the work that had been done, was systematically undone by the bush administration. Not only did the bush administration destabilize the entire middle east by its reckless policies, they broke up peace talks between North and South Korea, and any chance for a negotiated opportunity for North Korea to abandon its nuclear program. (Sound familiar)

The bush policy of leading the U.S. out of treaties such as the ABN treaty, along with breaking up diplomatic inroads started by previous administrations, was a complete disaster, and set any possibility of peace back decades.

The silence of the press regarding the bush administration, ignoring, and essentially throwing away the Hart/Rudman report which had specific recommendations on the vulnerability of the U.S. and led to 9/11 was a complete failure of the bush administration, helped along by the MSM:

http://baltimorechronicle.com/media2_oct01.html

The free pass our illustrious media gave to the bush administration during the first term, and two years into their second term in office destabilized the entire world, and came very close to causing a world wide depression with their policies of deregulation. It is no surprise that the opinion polls on the Iran deal went from the majority of Americans supporting it, to the majority opposed to it, since they gave mostly unfettered carte blanche to the republicans, and dick cheney, why the "deal was bad", without doing their job of asking them not only tough questions, but pointing out that their previous policies were a disaster. No, the media through the likes of Judith Miller, and quite a few others in the fourth estate have a lot of blood on their hands, not only for not doing their job, but for misrepresenting the facts.

You may not get a lot of responses, because most DUers will just read your thread and agree quietly. But what you are saying needs to be said.

My post was simply intended to point out that what goes around comes around. When I learned that Netanyahu's brother was killed at Entebbe, I realized what horrible mistakes the Palestinians made with their terror attacks.

And of course we make similar mistakes thinking we can resolve things militarily, get revenge somehow or attention for the bad things other people do to us with violent attacks and murders.

Doesn't work.

Hitler and WWII grew out of the humiliation of the German people and the impoverishment of Germany following WWI, which grew out of the diplomatic errors of the period prior to WWI.

The right approach? Patience and intelligent analysis of the motivations of others.

But your post is excellent. Please post it as an OP.

seemed to learn

I agree with you. it is way over due for a negotiated settlement and peace in the Middle East

Thanks

as Christian Zionists would currently have it. Speaking of, women are typically less inclined than men to "work with" troublemakers than get rid of them. I'm putting my trust in Hillary to be a far better supporter of Israel's security than the Bush administration ever was. But in a quite different way.

Another reason to vote against her, and I will.

and his record on the issue (in my eyes) is pretty decent.

Then, who are you voting for in the primary?

He's not quite as pro-Israel as Clinton is. I think we can agree on that.