41 share
very strong interest
<<< Understand that this oger of a man, just recognized a terror organization as the Principle in Gaza and sided with Jihad (in Gaza, Turkey and Qatar) as he attempted to negotiate a full blown Israeli surrender under the guise of a temporary peace treaty. You think he and Obama would represent America differently? News flash: they haven't.
From The Federaist: Let’s concede for a moment
that most of us don’t
believe the United States should be taking sides in conflicts abroad. Even
so, most Americans would probably agree that at a minimum our diplomatic
efforts should not cause unnecessary harm. Which brings me to Secretary of
State John Kerry’s recent misadventure in the Middle East .
It seems like a rather big
deal that Egypt , Israel , Fatah , Jordan , Saudi Arabia —ostensibly, all allies
of ours—agree on anything. This development, one imagines, might be something
the United States
would be interested in fostering rather than
destroying. Certainly, the idea that Hamas’ power should be neutralized and
the influence of the “moderate” Palestinian authority expanded, sounds like a
plan worth pursuing.
Or so you would think. But
instead, it looks like Kerry ignored an Egyptian-led ceasefire effort and
handed Israelis a
document that offered them this:
Rather than empowering
Fatah, it recognizes Hamas as the legitimate authority in the Gaza Strip, although
it’s considered a terrorist organization by the Justice Department and an
entity that’s founding principle and driving
purpose is to eliminate Israel and replace it with an Islamic
state.
Rather than choking off
this organization’s lifeline, the agreement would have allowed them to collect
billions in ‘charity’ that would be been able to use to rearm, retrench, and
re-engage in hostilities.
And all the while, it
would have made no demands on Hamas to purge itself of rockets, or tunnels, or
other weaponry that destabilizes the area—while at the same, the ceasefire
would have limited Israel ’s
ability to take them out. (Update: This final point is disputed by U.S.
officials.)
Hamas would have conceded
nothing. No nation would have accepted such terms, not after what’s transpired,
and naturally it was rejected unanimously by an Israeli cabinet that includes
the ideological left, center, and right. Not only did the proposal irritate
Israel—a nation often accused of warmongering for kicks—but it also upset Egypt
and the Palestinian Authority . . . . . Read the full
article at The Federalist, here.
No comments:
Post a Comment