won't give that easly the golan hights, even under USA presure, it will lead only to israel would get closer to Russia, that's the one who can stop Iran. syria means nothing to Israel except for hizb.

Israel doesn't want to give up the fresh water sources of the golan heights.

... and if they are not backed by actions, they have no value. There will not be ANY kind of Peace in the ME for as long as Syria, Iran and the rest of the terror sponsors and their pets in Lebanon, Iraq, Gaza etc. do not ACT for peace. Obama will soon discover that Arabs say one thing and actualy DO the exact opposite. Arabs say one thing in English - usually pleasing to the non-Arabs - and the other in Arabic, to their masses - usually meant to perpetuate hatred, incitement, racism and terror against ALL non-Muslims. It is a pity that as a result of Obama's naiive policy, many Americans will pay with their lives - MANY MORE than in all the wars against terror and Muslim tyrants fought by the US under any administration. I wonder how long it will take Obama to wake up and understand that all his actions are percieved by Muslims as appeasement, weakness and lack of will to fight for the American values.

The US activity in our region was clearly visible before Obama took office. Obama himself and many of his officials (we could all see who they were: Rice Powers, Brezenski, Mitchell and on the list goes)were seasoned anti Israel left wing ideologues or anti Jew Arabists from way back. The Jews of the US havent worked it out yet , but they helped elect a President who honestly believes that the so called Palestinian/Israeli conflict (read ISRAEL)is responsible for all conflicts from Kashmer to Morrocco and for the Muslim insurgencies as far away as the Phillipines and Thailand. Beat Israel down to size (make the Jew submit)back into undefendable borders and you have hey presto solved all Muslim conflict and issues with the West.

The real tragedy is that 80% of American Jews strongly approve of and support Obama.

Who said Israel must not rock the boat.Obama said his future is to CHANGE Israel changes,

Obama is Muslim. His closest friends in Chicago are Farakhan and Write. They are very close, and both are Muslims. Write built his "Thug Church", as they call it now, to invite Muslims who do not want to observe strict Muslim laws (the latter go yo Farakhan). Obama had NO other close friends except, perhaps, one left-wing radical. Bibi should think about Obama like he is talking to Abbas.

Shifferman's and defense idea of return of golan to syria is a non starter. Olmert was a total disaster and knew nothing, zero about the value of a hikl. He was a dumbell, crook, liar and coward. Peace for peace is reasonable. Israel will not sell its security for Obama's wishes. And barak should stay out of long term strategy as he started the whole surrender policy in the first place.No more steps back period.

The drift of the changing US policy began with Bush, is accelerating under Obama. Bush, by invading Iraq promoted indirectly Iranian ambitions. By decapitating the Sunni-led Baath regime with a Shiite-led regime Bush neutralized Iran’s only credible enemy, moved the Iranian threat from the Iraqi to the Saudi border, and ironically made the US dependent on Iran to control the Shiite militias it funds and trains in Iraq. This is the reason Bush broke with 30 years US policy of isolating the Islamic Republic and opened its State Department interest section in the heart of Teheran. In effect the US and Iran have entered into alliance over Iraq. In practice this means that if Israel wants the continued, if reduced, support of the United States then Israel will have to accept US terms for that support. And those terms are, 1. hands off Iran and acceptance of US strategic interests in that country; 2. Israel will make peace with the Palestinians and Syria, bending to their demands which are viewed as basically acceptable in the eyes of the US. As regards #1, Israel has already been publicly warned by the US vice president, Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff not to attack Iranian nuclear facilities. As regards #2, well the straws have been in the wind for some time, insistence on the two-state solution, repeated visits by US lawmakers and administration representatives to Syria. According to a recent article, Israel can expect increasing pressure from Obama to close deals with both, or the US will be far more involved in closing the deal than ever. It is also reported that Syria is no longer interested in pursuing talks with Israel via Turkey in anticipation of the US delivering a better deal.

First phone call to Abbas. First interview to al' Arabiyah. Video to the "Islamic Republic" of Iran - not to its people. That bow to the Custodian of the Two Mosques, and support for the Saudi "Peace Plan". No problem with Iran enriching while we talk. Engaging on Durban II, and the intent to join the Human Rights Council. And the active embrace of Syria. Oh, and there's more. More arms to Lebanon, both directly and via Turkey. US green light for joint Turkey-Syria military exercise. The daily warning against taking action against Iran. The Mitchell trip. Clinton whining about house demolitions. Jones to NSC. Freeman (almost) to NIE. No F-22s, no F-35s with Israeli mods, and a likely drop in funding for anti-missile defense. And let's not forget how Ashkenazi was snubbed by everyone but Jones and Ross on his trip to the US to discuss the Iranian issue. And all they wanted to talk about, it seemed, was a Palestinian state. Face it. Obama will not go down as Israel's "greatest friend ever". And Israel must be prepared to tell the US "No" when the crunch comes.

If words are so cheap in the Middle East, why would it hurt for America to attempt a dialogue with Syria? We all know that the Syrians are two-faced, but it can't hurt for Obama to make an overture to make it seem like America wants to engage them. Obama is a reflective person who will weigh all the pros and cons before he sides with any party. This is the way his personality is, from what I've witnessed. He is a much shrewder politician than you all are giving him credit for. Besides, Israel has the option not to accept a deal on the Golan, even if that is frustrating to the Obama administration. Don't underestimate the value America places in having Israel as the only reliable democratic ally in the entire Middle East. You'll only be sold down the river if you allow yourselves to be.

You are quite correct, but it will take a little more time for the "penny to drop" for most of the talkbackers here

gamble. I think he knows the eventual outcome ahead of time but is bringing a new tactic to the party. While I never would agree with this policy personally, he will find himself frustrated and talking to himself when he realizes what deal-making in the ME is like. This ain't no poor Chicago neighborhood looking for a new soup kitchen...that I assure you.

of game are going to stay the same - us and eu have to keep cheap oil flow from me. us does not care about israel, if not powerful jewish lobby israel would be gone long ago. on the other hand israel, has an ace over me oil, but never played it .

What ace?

This is exactly what all the far left zionist hating, liberal American Jews wanted. If Bibi and Israel are not strong enough to stand alone it will be all over for Israel as a Middle East powerhouse. Israel's only friends in the U.S. are Evangical Christians who have no power with this Muslim Obama's administration.

israil can put rules but usa can changed it ..simply israil can put new rules not that of lieberman . becouse he has not faith on what he said . he thinks that policy is oppurtinities //. but the base is not . it is benifits .. the tune of war on terror . had bad effect mainly to americans .

what would happen if srael bombs iran? or saudies?, rosie.

I'm not putting my money on the horse learning to talk. The poritz will be a lame duck in 3 years, worst case scenario.