Future of US bound to Mideast + Obama's call to Israel for 2 state solution

[alhoon]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110519/...ama_mideast_12

" President Barack Obama says the future of the U.S. is bound to the Middle East and North Africa by the forces of economics, security, history and fate.
Obama opened a major speech on U.S. policy in the region by trying to tell Americans why it matters to them even though the countries "may be a great distance from our shores."
He made the comments at the State Department Thursday in a speech meant as his first comprehensive response to revolts sweeping the Arab world"

Did Americans really need convincing (with crude oil at prices unimaginable 10 years ago) that the future of their country lies in middle east? Oil makes industry, power generators and cars move. USA is an industrial giant. Their fate is indeed tied with middle east.

As for the carrot, so people there won't draw blood?
"
The president plans to forgive roughly $1 billion in debt owed by Egypt to free up money for job-creation efforts there. And he will reveal other steps to bolster loans, trade and international support in Egypt and in Tunisia, where uprisings led to dictators being overturned. Protesters in Bahrain, Yemen, Syria and other nations have endured brutal setbacks."
Interesting move.


EDIT:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_theenv...inian-conflict

The United States believes that negotiations should result in two states, with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan, and Egypt, and permanent Israeli borders with Palestine," Obama said, laying out the U.S. position. "We believe the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states. The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves, and reach their potential, in a sovereign and contiguous state.

Wow! Just wow!
I'm really glad that Obama found the balls required to say that. I mean, I already admired him and all, but that was beyond my expectations. Kudos to Obama.


EDIT 2:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/us_obama_mideast_netanyahu

Israel said the United States "does not understand reality" as its leader arrived in Washington on Friday after President Barack Obama endorsed a longstanding Palestinian demand on borders of a future state.

The right-wing Netanyahu, who has had strained relations with the Democrat Obama, reacted by saying in a statement that this could leave Israel with borders that were "indefensible."

"There is a feeling that Washington does not understand the reality, doesn't understand what we face," an official on board the plane taking Netanyahu to Washington told reporters.

[removeduser_487563287433]

The right move. The economic situation is not good for these countries and if democracy is to take root in a meaningful way it will probably only come about accompanied by economic growth.

[alhoon]

The right move. The economic situation is not good for these countries and if democracy is to take root in a meaningful way it will probably only come about accompanied by economic growth.

They could gift them 400 M1A1 tanks and give us the money!

[Azog 150]

As long as the US and its competitors are reliant on oil then the future of the US is indeed bound to the Middle East.




An interesting article concerning future Us foreign policy in the Middle East and Europe (And how they are intrinsically linked):

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...lantic-project

[Menelik_I]

As long as the US and its competitors are reliant on oil then the future of the US is indeed bound to the Middle East.

Sounds more like a meme reminiscent of the ''War for oil'' media babbling.

Here is the top 6 countries from where US gets their oil.

1 CANADA 924,285
2 SAUDI ARABIA 399,228
3 MEXICO
4 NIGERIA
5 VENEZUELA
6 ANGOLA

The top five exporting countries accounted for 77 percent of United States crude oil imports

So is the US really that bound to Middle East oil or is this just political speech creating its own reality uh
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/p...nt/import.html
http://www.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_...im0_mbbl_a.htm

They could gift them 400 M1A1 tanks and give us the money!

Hey Beggars don't choose ... but I support your idea

Wait when the oil peak production will kick up the prices. You will discover how awesome are Australia, Canada and Kazakhstan.

Tar sands, shale gas, ultra heavy oi ... I mean the winter in Camberra the beatiful Canada Taiga and those funny Borrat people

Anyway at least wacky Arabs won't try to kill you for making them rich.

[Azog 150]

Sounds more like a meme reminiscent of the ''War for oil'' media babbling.

Here is the top 6 countries from where US gets their oil.

1 CANADA 924,285
2 SAUDI ARABIA 399,228
3 MEXICO
4 NIGERIA
5 VENEZUELA
6 ANGOLA



So is the US really that bound to Middle East oil or is this just political speech creating its own reality uh
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/p...nt/import.html
http://www.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_...im0_mbbl_a.htm



Hey Beggars don't choose ... but I support your idea

Nice to see you completely ignored my other post. 25% of US oil imports come from the Middle East. Thats a massive amount of oil. And again, as stated, global oil prices are heavily tied to the Middle East. And not only does US influence in the Middle East allow it to secure its own oil, it gives it some influence over its competitors oil supplies as well.

Tell me, why do you think the Middle East is important to global politics in the first place? Are you telling me it has nothing to do with that lovely black stuff?

[Menelik_I]

Tell me, why do you think the Middle East is important to global politics in the first place? Are you telling me it has nothing to do with that lovely black stuff?

You are taking a leap there, the question ''Is future of US bound to Mideast?''

I'm arguing that the US future isn't bound to ME has they they are already more dependent on Canada and others.

A disturbance on the Saudi oil flow might be painful for the US, but nothing that Obama proposed is going in any way of shape work in that goal.

Saudi Monarchy going down or Iran closing the Ormuz straits might my be a threat ... but anything else is pretty much minimal.

@Principe Alessandro:

At least in Dingoland Australia, Boratistan Kazakstant and LolCanada no extremist nutjob is going to try to blow you up for paying him billions.

[Imperial]

As long as the US and its competitors are reliant on oil then the future of the US is indeed bound to the Middle East.

Not as reliant on the Middle East as you may think.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/p...nt/import.html

There are only 4 countries out of the top 15 that are in the Middle East.

[Azog 150]

Not as reliant on the Middle East as you may think.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/p...nt/import.html

There are only 4 countries out of the top 15 that are in the Middle East.

And yet nearly 1/4 of US oil imports originate in the Middle East, which is still a very very significant amount (Especially considering how much oil the US consumes). Plus, as Alhoon stated, global oil prices are highly effected by events in the Middle East

[alhoon]

Yet, world oil prices are very, very much affected by middle east. Most of the reserves are there.

[Principe Alessandro]

Wait when the oil peak production will kick up the prices. You will discover how awesome are Australia, Canada and Kazakhstan.

[justicar5]

Tar sands, shale gas, ultra heavy oi ... I mean the winter in Camberra the beatiful Canada Taiga and those funny Borrat people

Anyway at least wacky Arabs won't try to kill you for making them rich.

All of those stated sources of oil are uneconomical given current oil prices, which is tied to 'peak production' (that being the limit on what can be extracted given current viable sources and technologies) oil prices will rise, even if the supply is their, as the cost of extraction is going up.

By openly supporting a position that is obviously unacceptable to Israel, its ally. Israel is heavily criticized and scrutinized by the larger world, this somewhat weakens their position when its most powerful ally openly disagrees with their views on what is an acceptable resolution.

since their position 'is do what we say or starve under embargo' I can't see an issue with telling them to sit down shut up and actually enter peace talks in good faith. (Rather than starting the air strikes as soon as the talks start)

[Menelik_I]

All of those stated sources of oil are uneconomical given current oil prices, which is tied to 'peak production' (that being the limit on what can be extracted given current viable sources and technologies) oil prices will rise, even if the supply is their, as the cost of extraction is going up.

Just like the end of easily productive first oil fields in the US has led to a rush to the Arabian fields, the end of the Arabian fields will put the heavier fields into productive line.

first the easily extractable oil and those difficult follow.

[MehemtAli_Pasha]

[URL]The president plans to forgive roughly $1 billion in debt owed by Egypt to free up money for job-creation efforts there.

will the US policy towards Egypt be always like, i pay you, you like me? it worked with Mubarak but it's not clear yet if it would work with a democratic regime.

[motiv-8]

Anybody else watch that speech? I got to see it while knocking out some miles on the bike, and it was really, really good. A complete intellectual refutation of the Bush Doctrine with an outline for its utter replacement. Just enough mix of idealism with realism. Like with all press conferences, however, the devil is in the details. We've heard the rhetoric about leadership and moral courage before, but it never seems to match up with what we do. We shall see. Overall in the last six months I've seen a very Theodore Roosevelt style of approach out of Obama, and I rather like it.

will the US policy towards Egypt be always like, i pay you, you like me? it worked with Mubarak but it's not clear yet if it would work with a democratic regime.

It's not really about encouraging a democratic Egypt to like us, but really about being a carrot to incentivize continued progress towards democracy and liberalization. Although it would be great if a democratic Egypt did like us as well in the long run.

[King Gambrinus]

I get the feeling that so long as the Saudi's maintain general control over their area, the US certainly doesn't mind what the ME is up to.


They would have prefered Mubarak in power in Egypt, as well as no rebellion in Syria, since these events mean Israel can really come under threat.


No way will the US be "bound" to anybody any time soon though. They could probably live off their own resources and market incase there is a war...

[alhoon]

But they won't like it, it will bite.

[Sir Pignans]

Yes. Their future is bound willingly though, they could detatch themselves, but somehow I doubt it.

[alhoon]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_theenvoy/20110519/ts_yblog_theenvoy/obama-lays-out-u-s-vision-for-supporting-arab-democracy-resolving-israeli-palestinian-conflict

The United States believes that negotiations should result in two states, with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan, and Egypt, and permanent Israeli borders with Palestine," Obama said, laying out the U.S. position. "We believe the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states. The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves, and reach their potential, in a sovereign and contiguous state.

Wow! Just wow!
I'm really glad that Obama found the balls required to say that. I mean, I already admired him and all, but that was beyond my expectations. Kudos to Obama.

[Menelik_I]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_theenvoy/20110519/ts_yblog_theenvoy/obama-lays-out-u-s-vision-for-supporting-arab-democracy-resolving-israeli-palestinian-conflict


Wow! Just wow!
I'm really glad that Obama found the balls required to say that. I mean, I already admired him and all, but that was beyond my expectations. Kudos to Obama.

No balls were required to be found has this have been the standard US proposal, you just misunderstood him.

He didn't said that Israel ought to return to 1967 unconditionally, it is ''based on'' no ''return to'' and it has been the standard negotiation procedure ... or is my Robert based English failing me



In related news Netanyahu tell Obama to shove it ... so my English is failing or Obama didn't meant it but this how the statement was perceived ?

Native English Speakers please ... rescue me.

Israel’s prime minister has rejected a key aspect of President Barack Obama’s policy speech, saying that a return to his country’s 1967 borders would spell disaster for the Jewish state.

In a statement released late Thursday, Benjamin Netanyahu called the 1967 lines “indefensible.”

ETA:

Netanyahu's already said off Punk

Fixed
Harvard Professor vs Israel Ex-special forces dude ... you know where my bets are