Obama: 'Idealistic incompetence'
I've had this sitting open on my desk for a couple of days and never got around to reading it. But now that I've read it, it's too good not to pass on (Hat Tip: NY Nana). I have not read the longer article that he uses as a jumping off point (perhaps I should), but this article by Rick Richman does a really good job of explaining why President Obama's relations with Israel are beyond repair. But it was not the push for a total, uncompromising settlement freeze, however, that was the key moment. That moment was, ironically, the one Obama considered one of his triumphs: the Cairo “address to the Muslim world”:Read the whole thing. It's spot-on.Taken as a whole, the speech was simply a craven embarrassment; but the references it made to Israel could not have been more alienating and insulting had they been calculated for the purpose. How Obama’s speechwriters and advisors became convinced that equating the Holocaust with the Palestinian nakba . . . comparing Israeli treatment of the Palestinians to segregation in the United States, and pointing to the Jewish people’s “tragic history” as the sole justification for Israel’s existence would assuage Israeli concerns about the new administration must remain a question for history to answer. There is no doubt, however, that this single speech (which everyone in Israel watched) did more to demolish Obama’s credibility in Israeli eyes than any of his demands on Netanyahu ever could have.The Cairo speech, with its emphasis on the Holocaust as the justification for Israel (to the exclusion of thousands of years of Jewish civilization and historical claims to the Land predating by centuries the birth of Islam and extending through the 20th century in the Balfour Declaration) revealed a “glaring ignorance of Israeli history and sensibilities,” as did the reference to segregation, which recalled the 1975 UN resolution equating Zionism with racism.
But the worst was Obama’s moral equivalence between Nazi genocide and the Arab displacement in 1948, occasioned by a war the Arabs started after rejecting — not for the first or last time — a two-state solution:It is true that 1948 was a catastrophe for the Palestinians, and many thousands of them were displaced — voluntarily and involuntarily — as a result of the war; but for many Jews (and many non-Jews) the equation of this to the Holocaust was not only morally appalling but served to minimize a genocide that is still within living memory, and did so in front of an audience that often claims it never happened at all.Watching Obama, Israelis recognized something they have seen before in the violent and unstable Middle East: idealistic incompetence. That judgment was confirmed by Obama’s failure, also glaringly obvious, to obtain any steps toward normalization to accompany any new settlement freeze, and his passive encouragement of maximalist Palestinian claims even after the most pliant prime minister in Israeli history had spent a year in the Annapolis Process unsuccessfully offering the Palestinians a state.
The result is that “[Obama’s] relationship with the Israelis is now so damaged that Netanyahu probably could not sell further concessions to the Israeli public even if he wanted to (which he most certainly does not).”
posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 2:50 AM
3 Comments:
Thanks for the hat tip, Carl.
This article really is spot-on, and has Hussein pegged all too well.
'Obama’s moral equivalence between Nazi genocide and the Arab displacement in 1948..'
That stood out, especially since I was born in 1938, and have memories of what happened, sitting safely in the US. He was born well after 1948, and just as was done with this year's Nobel (a done deal less than 2 weeks after he took office), he speaks of what he knows..nothing.
At least most Israelis have woken up to the danger he presents for and to Israel. Far too many American Jews still are refusing to see the real Obama as a danger to and an enemy of Israel. And these same American Jews do not realize that he is also their enemy.
They had better wake up now, or they will realize when it is too late.
Anyone who can compare the nazis and the Shoah to what the arabs brought upon themselves, as there never was a 'Palestine' to begin with? I have some choice words for them.
I have to wonder if Rahm Emanuel was involved in this.
Obama was born the year before me - in 1961 and we are both of the same generation. Our beliefs in life as Carl can testify, are radically different. The basic problem is Obama has very little deep understanding of the Middle East much less than how international relations work. Barry Rubin has tried to give the new President a crash course in both but I wonder if any one in the White House reads his blog. It would save American policymakers a lot of time and needless heartache.
Dear Leader Hussein touts the entire "Palestinian" propaganda line, which has been fed to him for decades by so many infamous Israel-haters Rashid Khalidi, Edward Said, Bill Ayers, George Soros, "Reverend" Wright, Rahm Emanuel, Samantha Powers, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Dhimmi Carter, to name just a few. He owes something big time to the Saudi king to whom he bowed so obsequiously. In this, his Cairo speech was very carefully calibrated. Its misrepresentation of history was very deliberate, even as he said, most ridiculously, that he is a "student of history".
Hamas openly helped him in his election bid by donated lots of money and manning call centers in Gaza.
His very first call to a "world leader" upon taking over the WH was to Abu Mazen.
The problem is that the hatred for Israel goes beyond speechwriters and advisors. Hussein is a brainwashed puppet. He is an insult to humanity. And, therefore, coupled by his Marxist "economic" and political theories, he is very dangerous.
Post a Comment
<< Home