"All Petraeus did was acknowledge the uncontroversial truth that 'conflict foments anti-American sentiment, due to a perception of U.S. favoritism for Israel. Arab anger over the Palestinian question limits the strength and depth of U.S. partnerships with governments and peoples in [the Middle East and South Asia] and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world. Meanwhile, al-Qaida and other militant groups exploit that anger to mobilize support. The conflict also gives Iran influence in the Arab world through its clients, Lebanese Hizballah and Hamas.' For this, Foxman labels Petraeus' views 'dangerous' while taking care to call him a 'patriot and hero.'"
Foxman completely reframed the issue. Petraeus' point was that Zionist intransigence makes things harder for the U.S. "mission" by giving the opposition more psychological ammunition against the U.S. Now, is Foxman an American or an Israeli in that regard?
"If only Israel would stop settlements, if only Israel would talk with Hamas, if only Israel would make concessions on refugees, if only it would share Jerusalem, everything in the region would then fall into line." No, Abe, everything in the region wouldn't fall into line, but the opposition wouldn't have Israel as a recruiting point.
I've said all along that the grievances of the Palestinians must be properly addressed. They never have been. It was a terrible mistake for President Harry Truman to cave into the Zionist's plans after all the terrorism, etc. The Zionists should never have been allowed to horn into the area as they did. Other accommodations should have been made, or the Zionists should have moved in with the view not to segregate but to be good neighbors as required by their own scriptures. The hardheartedness and wrath in the Bible is an exact reflection of the hardheartedness on the part of the people. It's cause and effect.