I wish Juan would sometime address the issue of so-called Saudi advocacy of Palestinians. There is some misconceptions out there. In practice, like all Arab governments, they have hypocrtically given lip service to the Palestinian cause. This ruse and pretense have been useful since when necessary, they would pressure Palestinians psoing as their advocates, just like Mubarak did , to compomise even further (although not much is left to surrender) when Americans/Israelis have asked them. They backed King Hussein when he massacred Palestinians, expelled Palestian workers during the first gulf war, and now are backing the junta in Egypt which does worse to Palestinians in Gaza than Israel. (No coincidence that Egypt literally calls Palestinians terrorists.) Their main concern was always Jerusalem and not the Palestinians and on that one they have been willing to compromise to. Have they and as a matter of fact any Arab country protested the genocide taking place in Yarmouk camp in Syria? Don't expect that. They are in fact opposed to freedom seeking and free spirit that Palestinians have come to represent in Middle East. A free Palestine would set a dangerous precedent.
Israel has been very smart in its 60 some years history to create new problems and issues to cover up the essential ones. In this regard, the main issue has always been return of refugees. Since 1948, every year UN has asked Israel to allow return of the refugees. Israel has always refused thinking rightly that after many years it will be a non problem. The task, and I may say the smart move, on the part of the progressive is to keep the problem alive. They should find practical ways in which refugees can be absorbed into Israel. More apratment buildings can be built, jobs for newly arrived creaed and immigration into countries such as USA should be made possible not only for Palestinians but also many jews who want to immigrate out of Israel are examples of practical steps that can be taken As progressives, we should not buy into concept of jewish majority state on the basis of our principles.
Asking for a two-state solution was a retreat by PLO; their original idea of one state for jews and arabs was the right one. That is one reason the fuzzy concept of a nation state for Palestinians was accepted by smart Israelis in Oslo. It could buy them more time. They have not only taken the US admisinttrations for a ride but deceived all of the left in the West too, unfortunately!
Joe, almost all of your points are wrong and you are cherrypicking what Juan said. Here are two examples.
1- US wanted to keep up to 10, 000 forces in Afghanistan not few hundreds. I don't know where your sources are.
2 - The schedule to withdraw Iraq was drawn under Bush. Iraqis cleverly deceived Americans who had built huge fortresses and embassies to stay permanently. Do you remember several trips that Biden took and our ambassodors begging Iraqis to let a residual force stay?
3- Your analysis of change of government may cause you to be laughed out of town. If each time economy is not doing well a party loses power then why was Obama reelected in 2012.
4 - Your last statement "can he not see hte dangers?..." implies that if he is a little better than Bush we should jump up and down. Don't you see that is exactly why people are disappointed in him?
I wish Juan would sometime address the issue of so-called Saudi advocacy of Palestinians. There is some misconceptions out there. In practice, like all Arab governments, they have hypocrtically given lip service to the Palestinian cause. This ruse and pretense have been useful since when necessary, they would pressure Palestinians psoing as their advocates, just like Mubarak did , to compomise even further (although not much is left to surrender) when Americans/Israelis have asked them. They backed King Hussein when he massacred Palestinians, expelled Palestian workers during the first gulf war, and now are backing the junta in Egypt which does worse to Palestinians in Gaza than Israel. (No coincidence that Egypt literally calls Palestinians terrorists.) Their main concern was always Jerusalem and not the Palestinians and on that one they have been willing to compromise to. Have they and as a matter of fact any Arab country protested the genocide taking place in Yarmouk camp in Syria? Don't expect that. They are in fact opposed to freedom seeking and free spirit that Palestinians have come to represent in Middle East. A free Palestine would set a dangerous precedent.
Israel has been very smart in its 60 some years history to create new problems and issues to cover up the essential ones. In this regard, the main issue has always been return of refugees. Since 1948, every year UN has asked Israel to allow return of the refugees. Israel has always refused thinking rightly that after many years it will be a non problem. The task, and I may say the smart move, on the part of the progressive is to keep the problem alive. They should find practical ways in which refugees can be absorbed into Israel. More apratment buildings can be built, jobs for newly arrived creaed and immigration into countries such as USA should be made possible not only for Palestinians but also many jews who want to immigrate out of Israel are examples of practical steps that can be taken As progressives, we should not buy into concept of jewish majority state on the basis of our principles.
Asking for a two-state solution was a retreat by PLO; their original idea of one state for jews and arabs was the right one. That is one reason the fuzzy concept of a nation state for Palestinians was accepted by smart Israelis in Oslo. It could buy them more time. They have not only taken the US admisinttrations for a ride but deceived all of the left in the West too, unfortunately!
Joe, almost all of your points are wrong and you are cherrypicking what Juan said. Here are two examples.
1- US wanted to keep up to 10, 000 forces in Afghanistan not few hundreds. I don't know where your sources are.
2 - The schedule to withdraw Iraq was drawn under Bush. Iraqis cleverly deceived Americans who had built huge fortresses and embassies to stay permanently. Do you remember several trips that Biden took and our ambassodors begging Iraqis to let a residual force stay?
3- Your analysis of change of government may cause you to be laughed out of town. If each time economy is not doing well a party loses power then why was Obama reelected in 2012.
4 - Your last statement "can he not see hte dangers?..." implies that if he is a little better than Bush we should jump up and down. Don't you see that is exactly why people are disappointed in him?