First there was the unprecedented move of bringing Seders as annual events to the White House. Then there was the declaration that May, 2011 would be Jewish American Heritage Month. Then there was the Presidents support for maintaing American aid to Israel throughout 2018. Of course those detractors hesitate to point out that the President also firmly stood by the U.S. in the U.N. and that alone of all the Security Council nations has consistantly stood with Israel despite condemnations from everyone else.
Even when the President voted to earmark $ 205 million dollars in additional aid in the development of the Iron Dome Missle Protection System the detractors said "not enough:". But the President has stood firm in his friendship with Israel.
SO in contrast to the message spread by those with ODS (Obama Derangement Syndrome), the U.S. has shown over and over again what a great friend to Israel it is. Just today - the U.S. Government allocated an ADDITIONAL $ 235 million to develop the Arrow and David's Sling Missle Defense Systems. As Ynet Reports:
WASHINGTON – The Unites States has announced it will allocate $235 million for the development of safeguards against rockets and missiles that could be launched towards Israel by Hezbollah and Iran.
A large part of the funds will go towards the development of the David's Sling system, designed to intercept medium- to long-range rockets and cruise missiles, and the Arrow 2 and 3 systems against long-range ballistic missiles.
An Iron Dome Battery in Southern Israel
However, Pentagon officials were the ones who requested that Congress approve a $106 million aid budget for Israel's defense systems against missiles, on top of the Iron Dome budget.
Congress chose to nearly double that amount, approving a budget of $235 million for 2012, amounting to $25 million more than in 2011.
Also in Haaretz today: Israel's Defense Minister praises Obama's resolve, denies tensions with Netanyahu
The Israeli Defense Minister yet again spoke of the Presidents committment to the security of Israel and this time had kind words for the Administration as well. But more than that he said this regarding President Obama:
Barak said Israeli-U.S. defense coordination was "absolutely fine" and played down tension between Obama and Netanyahu. "They don't have to love each other. It's enough that they respect and understand that no one works as if they were alone, in a bubble."....
......"We are asked, sometimes, whether Obama is really a soft appeaser. To that, I say: 'Go ask Osama bin Laden." U.S. special forces killed the long elusive al Qaida leader in a lightning raid on his Pakistan hideout last May.
How much more does President Obama have to do for the sufferers of ODS? Nothing. He has done what it takes. He walks the walk.
The record is quite clear - President Obama and his administration is a friend to Israel in both word as well as in action. There is simply no way that a reasonable person can deny that fact.
I bet this gets covered heavily by Fox News.
ReplyDeleteNot.
Agreed drew... My bet is that the Republicans are just slamming their heads against the wall figuring how can they spin this latest. There is just so much bullshit you can spread before people notice the smell. The Republicans are at that point.
ReplyDeleteI think the people with ODS lack any reason. Hell, I'm willing to bet that Obama could come out in favor of everything the one-staters want and they would say it's part of some nefarious anti-Israel plan on his part. Of course, those of us that still do have our reason, and our common sense, realize that President Obama is pro-Israel, he is committed to Israel's security and Israel's future as a Jewish and democratic state.
ReplyDelete(livosh1)
ReplyDeleteIt is painfully obvious that people with ODS still have a problem with his skin color.
Of course he is deeply committed to Israel's security and its future. Always has been. But there is no use in arguing with racists who continuously make things up out of whole cloth in order to perpetuate their hate. They are not open to reasonable discourse. All they know is hate.
In any event, good on Obama . . . again.
I hate to disagree, but I must. It is the last sentence that changed an otherwise fine diary.
ReplyDeleteI wrote a longer comment about this, but it morphed into a potential post for my blog.
Where does ODS end and valid criticism begin?
Is any liberal that offers criticism unreasonable?
I'll leave it at that, except to point out that the $235 million was not additional, but total, as I read the article, and it was Congress that increased the Pentagon's initial request, the source of which is not clear.
I don't think it's necessarily racism. I do think that there are some pro-Israel folks who can't get past Obama's clumsy mistake on the settlement freeze issue. That mistake being that he made it easy for Abbas to refuse to negotiate unless there was a complete settlement freeze. It was a diplomatic and strategic blunder by Obama, but given the weight of the rest of his record, I don't think it makes him anti-Israel. It just makes him not as skilled as he should have been, and that's something we've seen time and again on domestic policy issues, too.
ReplyDeleteI also think it's long overdue for Obama to counter his Cairo speech by making a visit to Israel. He has yet to reach out directly to Israelis the way he has done to the Arab/Muslim world. When he does that (and it really needs to happen in the next 6-8 months), he will be able to demonstrate his pro-I credentials. Plus, it will make team p's tiny little heads explode, and that's always fun.
I have to agree.... likewise there are some pro-Obama folks who can't accept the fact that it WAS a clumsy mistake.
ReplyDeleteWas it malice toward Israel? No. Was it a shortsighted, clueless fuckup? Hell yes.
I agree and disagree Paul and Corwin.. Here is what I agree with... It was mishandled. But not out of a sense of malice or anti-Israel sentiment. That said, I am not sure that it makes any difference in any case given the PA is not really serious (witness them bringing in Hamas) and that Israel is not really serious either - look at... well... look at everything. It just isn't time in either sides opinon.
ReplyDeleteBUT I think Paul you are wrong when you say a visit to Israel would prove his Pro-I credentials. I think he has already proved them. A visit would be the right thing to do. But, really, the man has proved it time and time again.
Look at it this way. Ever notice how potential employers hate to start off telling you how much they're willing to pay you on a job posting? Or how a lot of products don't list a price? That's the position he put the Israelis in. Clueless, tone deaf, mishandled fuckup. Do I think he was deliberately trying to screw with Israel? No. Do I think he inadvertently tied one hand behind their back for them? Yes.
ReplyDeleteA visit would help in my opinion. It was said it would DEMONSTRATE, NOT PROVE pro-Israel credentials. And it would. Why must there be so much emphasis about proving everything anyway?
ReplyDeleteA visit would further help to reinforce the positive perception among Israelis, where there is divided opinion.
It can therefore be seen as a win-win for most, except for some Arab regimes and the too progressive anti-Israel folks.
How about moving the US embassy to Jerusalem? He can do it unilaterally, and it would be a major coup.
ReplyDelete(livosh1)
ReplyDeletePaul -- the problem with aggressively placing the blame on Obama for pursuit of the settlement freeze strategy is that this, at its core, is an attempt to shift any and all responsibility away from Bibi and Co. Those who aggressively call out Obama on the settlement freeze tactic are, by and large, giving a total pass to Bibi & Co. for the settlement policy. However clumsy the call for a settlement freeze may have been, its impact on the peace process pales in comparison to the actions of Bibi and Co., who consistently and intentionally fuck up even the slightest momentum for peace as soon as they can. So, when people point to Obama's action in a way that suggests that it is the ultimate shondah, while at the same time totally ignoring the actions of one of the parties to the conflict (and thereby absolving that side of any responsibility for the mess that exists), it's a safe bet that something else is at work here, and their criticism is a pretextual. Given the hysteria directed at Obama from some quarters in '08, which sought to paint him -- among other things -- as an antisemite, and given the rather blatant anti-Arab racism that is demonstrated by those who have sought to condemn him on this issue, I think there is more than enough evidence to indicate that racist attitudes are still a driving force in all of this.
Great discussion here folks.... I think I have to agree with livosh that there are other factors driving this as well.
ReplyDeleteIf the Presidents name was Bob Johnson and did the same stuff we would not be hearing BOO! regarding his "love for Israel" but, his name is Barak Huessain Obama. Bottom line. What more would people have him do?
Security cooperation between Israel and the U.S. is at an all time high. Bottom line for Israel is that the U.S. is fully committed to it's security and has demonstrated that both in the U.N. and in our relationships. I am sorry but I don't see the problem here.
@fizziks: Our embassy is supposed to be in Jerusalem, but Clinton, Bush II and Obama have kept on putting off the provisions of the Jerusalem Embassy Act doing that, using an escape clause in there to keep on delaying it every six months. There's actually a case winding through the courts now that will determine the extent of foreign relations powers when it comes to the executive vs. the legislative, as a couple whose child was born in Jerusalem (Americans who made aliyah), are seeking to have "Jerusalem, Israel," rather than "Jerusalem," put on their child's passport.
ReplyDelete@Reuven: Yeah, I'm saying that since at the moment the executive has the prerogative, Obama could just go ahead and move the embassy to Jerusalem. It would be huge!
ReplyDelete