Posted on 03/23/2015 3:51:36 AM PDT by lifeofgrace
One of Harry Truman’s most treasured possessions was a small Torah given to him by Dr. Chaim Weizmann, Israel’s first president. The gift was given in appreciation of a singular act of courage in a postwar world filled with deprivation and starvation in Europe, and an economic boom in America. Hundreds of thousands of Jewish refugees lived in the same camps constructed to efficiently kill and dispose of them.
At the stroke of midnight, May 14, 1948, the British mandate over Palestine ended, and they struck the Union Jack for the last time in Jerusalem. The blue and white Star of David flew for the first time over the Jewish state: Israel was established. Truman released a simple statement.
This Government has been informed that a Jewish state has been proclaimed in Palestine, and recognition has been requested by the provisional government thereof.The United States recognizes the provisional government as the de facto authority of the new State of Israel.
Signed: Harry Truman
It’s also helpful to know that Truman was a rather pious Christian man who believed in the promises of the Gospel, the Jewish roots of Christianity, and God’s promises that “all Israel will be saved.” It’s unlikely that Truman, were he alive today, would be part of the “boycott, divestment, sanctions”—BDS—movement toward Israel, even given 67 years of violence.
Why did Truman have to unilaterally, against the strong opposition of his own State Department and U.N. delegation, proclaim the de facto recognition of Israel? Because all other solutions had been exhausted. The U.N. partition plan (Resolution 181(II)). The Jewish Agency, which functioned as the immigration arm of the Mandate, supported Partition, as did the Jewish public, with some notable exceptions.
Every single Arab leader, and the Arab League as a group, opposed Partition. They refused to accept a two-state solution. They refused to recognize any Jewish state or Jewish political presence in Palestine. Their position as to the European Jewish refugees was that other countries should deal with them—other than the United States, which had severely limited Jewish immigration, there really was nowhere for the refugees to go, at least nowhere they’d be welcome or left alive.
At least the Arabs are consistent. They still reject a two-state solution, unless it’s lip service and in support of their real goals: destruction of Israel.
He sees the Palestine situation from a completely different lens than did Harry Truman. Regardless of American immigration policy in 1947, Obama likely believes that the Jews should not have been allowed to settle in Palestine, and that America should not have unilaterally recognized the State of Israel.
Obama wants to even the score, and become Harry Truman to the Palestinians. There is no other explanation for his public behavior of the last several months. For over 67 years, the Arab League has rejected any two-state solution, or even the existence of Israel. And now, instead of focusing on that long history of antagonism, Obama would rather focus on one pre-election remark by Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu.
Our president would rather focus on negotiations with Iran, which are so spurious that even France believes that the U.S. is being too soft on Tehran. The Obama administration has resorted to public humiliation for Netanyahu, delaying any congratulations for days, while quickly tweeting condolences for Iran’s President Rouhani’s loss of his mother.
.@JohnKerry: We extend deepest condolences to #Iran President @HassanRouhani and his family on passing of his mother. http://t.co/IW5SLqUhVc— Department of State (@StateDept) March 20, 2015
Obama used his “congratulatory” call with Netanyahu to offer criticism and rebuke.
The President reaffirmed the United States’ long-standing commitment to a two-state solution that results in a secure Israel alongside a sovereign and viable Palestine. On Iran, the President reiterated that the United States is focused on reaching a comprehensive deal with Iran that prevents Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon and verifiably assures the international community of the exclusively peaceful nature of its nuclear program.The Obama administration’s press machine has spun up it’s rhetoric against Netanyahu, citing his resistance to a two-state solution, despite Netanyahu’s clarification of his remarks—he opposes negotiating a two-state solution with the current “unity” government in Palestine, which includes Hamas—a group dedicated to Israel’s destruction. That’s not good enough, according to the administration. Yet, no Israeli government, whether led by Netanyahu’s Likud or Isaac Herzog’s Zionist Union party, would negotiate with Hamas. It’s not an option in Israel.
When the perennial U.N. resolution creating a Palestinian State, with or without the agreement of Israel, with borders imposed upon Israel by the “international community”, comes up before the Security Council, we should expect Obama to step out of the way, and not use America’s veto power. In fact, the US may vote in favor of the resolution.
At that point, President Obama can boldly step up and issue his own statement recognizing the government of Palestine, which, this time, Israel will reject as illegitimate.
Of course, as it did in 1948, this will mean war. After the Star of David was raised above Jerusalem, five Arab armies attacked the fledgling IDF. After two bloody years of war, Israel won, establishing its borders. Throughout the 1950’s and 60’s, Israel fought continually to maintain its border security. In 1967, Israel staged a preemptive attack against Egypt, Jordan and Syria, in advance of impending war, and in 1973, Egypt and Syria successfully launched a surprise attack against Israel, nearly crushing her.
Now, with Egypt preoccupied in its “Arab spring” and Syria in a civil war, Israel’s primary enemies are Hizbollah, an arm of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, Hamas, and Fatah/Muslim Brotherhood. Two of these will be “peace partners” in any Palestinian state, and the third is being coddled by Obama while it develops nuclear weapons.
When President Truman recognized Israel, he didn’t offer military assistance (although millions of dollars of WWII surplus were illegally funneled to Israel by American Jewish benefactors). He merely stood up to the world and pledged the moral support of the world’s only superpower, an act which was immediately followed by the Soviet Union's recognition of Israel, cementing its international standing.
President Obama stands poised to revert history 67 years, by removing the moral support of America’s only true friend and democratic ally in the Middle East. When he betrays Israel, not only will he have no regrets, he will also stand tall believing he is a hero.
The sad truth is that Barack Obama is no Harry Truman, and those who have misplaced their trust in Obama will reap only sorrow.
Well, even in the equivocating vocabulary of our liberal media, there is absolutely no equality between “the buck stops here” and “I read about it when you all did in the newspapers.”
I wish there were democrats like Truman today. Hell, I wish there were more than just a tiny few republicans like Truman today.
> Obama Is No Harry Truman
He’s not even Soupy Sales, because he’s not funny.
In the American republic, the reward for a presidential job well done is supposed be honor and admiration of the ages.
Serve, go home, and be one of hundreds of millions of other Americans who live under the common laws.
We treat presidents like hereditary royalty and wonder why they rule and live forever like kings.
Because he's NOT a President... he's some jerk the DNC scrounged up to be a compliant, unprincipled and irresponsible puppet for their agenda, a wind-up automaton who has no compunction about saying and doing the MOST preposterous, illogical, divisive and Un-American things on a daily (even hourly) basis.
No - a whole new category of comparison has to be created for “O” ... but certainly NOT ‘president’.
“The Obama administration has resorted to public humiliation for Netanyahu, delaying any congratulations for days, while quickly tweeting condolences for Iran’s President Rouhani’s loss of his mother.”
Very soon this bunch of Jr high school girls running America are going to get slapped upside the head by reality.
Worse than James Buchanan.
Harry Truman was no Harry Truman. I used to think pretty highly of him, until I saw how he treated the threat of communist subversion in our government.
It was not only far more important to him and his minions that the interests of the Democratic party were not hurt in the public eye, he approved of the destruction of individual citizens reputations to try to avoid it.
And even with that said, Harry Truman was better than any Democrat President and a vast majority of the politicians and other liberals from the 20th Century on.
“It’s impossible to compare “O” to any other US President.”
No other president has supported our enemies and provided them with nuclear weapons to destroy us. No other president has committed such treason.
If FDR had died a year earlier giving us Henry Wallace as President, and Wallace had beaten Dewey in 1944, our foreign policy towards the Soviet Union would have been like Obama's towards Iran and Muslim extremists.
Yep.
Unbelievable. A Communist, Henry Wallace a heartbeat away from the Presidency.
Mentioning Truman and Obama in one sentence? Is this insult Truman day?
There is no shame when it comes to a Democrat. That’s how they roll.
The other person who was seriously considered in 1944 was James Byrnes of SC, who was certainly very competent. I have run across two explanations for why Byrnes was passed over--that as a South Carolina Democrat he was tied to support for segregation, and that as a former Catholic who had become an Episcopalian, he could have cost the party some Catholic votes.
Because Harry wasn't a commie, kenyan, muslim like Hussein -
HE WAS A NATURAL BORN AMERICAN VETERAN WHO LOVED THIS COUNTRY!.
Not a Harry Truman? Obama isn’t even a George McGovern or a Michael Dukakis.
Or an Al Franken, or even Barney Frank. He is, however, arguably better than Joe Biden.
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.