Posted on 06/24/2002 5:39:14 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
WASHINGTON, June 23 (UPI) -- President George W. Bush is tentatively scheduled to deliver a speech Monday unveiling his administration's new Middle East policy, Ha'aretz reported, citing White House officials.
Bush was scheduled to deliver the speech last week, but decided to postpone following the two suicide bombings in Jerusalem, in which 26 people were killed and the subsequent Israeli reaction.
The president spent the weekend conferring with advisers on the timing and details of the much-anticipated speech, which will outline new American proposals to end the Middle East conflict.
The newspaper reported in its Monday edition that aides want Bush to make the speech before heading to Canada on Tuesday for a three-day summit of the Group of Eight industrialized nations.
Palestinian Authority minister Nabil Sha'ath called on President Bush to declare his support for a Palestinian state that would be created within two years.
Sha'ath told "Fox News Sunday" he hoped Bush "will set a timeline of not more than two years" in his call for the establishment of Palestinian state.
"Of course we would like to declare a state that would be in effect legally bound with the borders of 1967," he said. In practice, however, "the borders will be negotiated... We don't mind some minor modifications on the '67 borders on a swap basis."
Bush is expected Monday to call for formation of a state of Palestine with permanent borders within three years. The new U.S. policy is expected to call for the early creation, perhaps within a year, pf a Palestinian state with temporary, or provisional, borders.
Once a state is established, Israel would be asked to halt incursions into Palestinian areas, freeze settlement building and be willing to negotiate with the Palestinians, the newspaper said.
The president's proposal for a temporary Palestinian state was met with caution Sunday by lawmakers who realize that achieving peace between Israelis and Palestinians will not come easy.
"The quite frank fact is there has been such a deterioration in the Middle East that there is no ground on which the Palestinians and the Israelis can talk to one another," said Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., on CNN's "Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer."
"I think he's right now the only man with a plan. I hope it will work," said Lott, of Bush's controversial proposal. "But one of the things you have to understand about Israel today, Israel will have freedom and it will have peace in that order and on their own terms."
Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., told CNN the president "has to be careful that we don't get a signal that violence and suicide bombings or homicide bombings as I call them, are going to be rewarded."
Copyright © 2002 United Press International
Who is "WE"??? Did he have a mouse in his pocket? That was part of Clintoon's failed proposal,...his only concession to Israel.
Oh, right, Yasser WAS yammering the other day that, after two years, he is suddenly 'ready' to accept Clinton's deal. Of couse, he said that last summer, too...he didn't mean it then....
When Bush gives his speech, I am going to be listening very closely to the conditions. The homicide bombings are largely done by a Hamas who do not want a state. Hamas is very active everytime it looks like everyone might be coming to the table. Right now, the PR that is winning is Israel is a horrible occupier. Well, if you take that away from the Palestinians. If you call their PR (that hides their real aim) bluff and give them what they call for. If you do that... and the violence continues... then you will have exposed them to the world. Even though you would have to be stupid to not understand the goal of Hamas, etc. is the destruction of Israel... the world seems to live in stupid land.
Well, let's say they get their land... they get their state... conditioned on acting like human beings... and the violence continues... then Israel and US can say to the world... they have revealed themselves to be what they truly are. They stand naked and exposed to the world. Article 22 of the PLO charter, the one they say they don't mean... they one they say they don't hold to anymore... is the whole reason for being.
I do believe Bush will call for a Palestinian state... this is a good thing. But, the conditions will be such that the Palestinians must stop acting like animals and act like civilized human beings. They must do away with their current leadership and their current aims... If they cannot, then no state... no nothing... If article 22 remains and is continued to be acted on... then they will have to live with the consequences of that action. They are getting the only chance Bush will give them. Then he can go to the world community and say... you can't make peace with these people for we have given them what they want and still the violence continues.
I believe Bush understands Israel's real enemey is not Hamas but Saddam Hussein. Israel seems to understand this too.
I read some of these posts, and I see people jumping to conclusions. Calling Bush a sell-out, etc. Israel, herself, does not want to rule over Palestinians. As early as August of 1967, the Israeli government have looked for ways to live with the Palestinians in peace.
But again... I think Bush is frustrated because Iraq has done her job well. By stirring up the Palestinians (especially Hamas)... it buys Iraq precious time to continue to get weapons of mass destruction.
So, I've said it twice... I will say it again... before we jump to conclusions and call Bush all sorts of names... let's hear the speech first. I believe everyone will be pleasantly surprised.
LOL...yes.
Now please correct me if I'M wrong, but isn't Boxer the idiot who held out against testroying the Taliban?
By the way, I sure wouldn't like to be King Hussein of Jordan, caught between the Palestinians and Iraq. I think Jordan also enters into the equation, as they are on board with us this time, unlike 1991.
However, I would bet any amount of money I could lay my hands on that that is not what Bush is going to say today. That would be entirely out of character for him -- or for any other President, for that matter.
For one, in these strange days, I doubt he ever baits the left and the media that openly (even though they bait him constantly).
And remember, when Reagan said "the bombing starts in five minutes", he was making a joke.
When [if] an attack on Iraq ever comes, it will be slow, semi-diplomatic oozing toward a short, punchy, war. It will come [if it comes] after much waiting and frustration, not with a dramatic pronouncement and action.
Thats a bunch of hoot. The road to peace will only be achieved through our disinvolvement in the Middle East. Screw'em. Can we possibly put America first? Middle East "peace" is just a pipe dream...let em all dog it out themselves...may the best Abdul win. All this time and money spent on "Middle East peace" while America crumbles. We cant even keep alien invaders from our OWN borders, much less BUY anything that is MANUFACTURED in the USA. Its getting old...real old.
We have to propose a so-called Palestinian state. This is the excuse the terrorists have been using for homocide bombings and mortar attacks for decades. Most of the West, INCLUDING people who are old enough to know better, believe them now.
If the Palestinians DO get a state...what happens when the first mortar attack or homocide bomb comes across the newly formed border into Israel? The new Palestinian state will also be bound by UN treaties, and Israel would be well within it's rights to declare such an act to be an act of war by an enemy state.
Yesser knows that. The PLA, PLF, PLFP, al Aqsa Martyr Brigade, Hezbollah, Hamas...they all know that too. President Bush will make the offer. The terrorists will refuse.
Heck, if THAT isn't proof enough for the Bush bashers, how about the rather obvious fact that the Palestinians are insisting that President BUSH propose an independant Palestinian state...while at the same time only proposing to accept the elements of CLINTON'S proposal that they refused before?? They're already setting up the necessary elements to 'justify' a renewed intifada.
C'mon, people...it's glaringly obvious.
LOL...
Actually, I don't envy the razer thin tightrope the King of Jordan is balancing on right now either. With luck, he will be instrumental in a mostly bloodless toppling of Saddam's regime.
I don't think President Bush can wait too long in making his proposal. He's walking a tightrope as razer thin as King Abdullah's. If he waits, the terrorists will use his hesitation as an excuse to bomb in Israel. If he doesn't wait, the terrorists will use the fact that his proposal doesn't contain the stuff they now say they want...to bomb Israel.
Either way, it looks like President Bush has put Yasser into check again. (It's great to know that another FReeper besides me understands the analogy between politics and chess)
These were orders issued by one American naval commander to another on the eve of a decisive naval engagement. Points to anyone who can tell me who the commanders were, and what battle it was.
Admiral Nimitz's operations order to Rear Admiral Spruance before the Battle of Midway.
...Many of these activities are blamed by officials as inspired by "Wahhabism" - the strict form of Islam which predominates in Saudi Arabia. But are Wahhabis behind all the unrest in the region?
'Enemies of stability'
Supporters of the Wahhabi theory point to the fact that one of the main sponsors of international Islamic militancy is the dissident Saudi millionaire Osama bin Laden.
World: Europe Analysis: The threat from Islamic militancy
From August 1999 no less!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.