For the first time, Netanyauhu endorses a palestinian State.

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
His offer talked about what would be preconditions.

I quoted is statement that stated no preconditions.

Are you incapable of identifying that as the doublespeak which it is?

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
It sounds like both sides demand preconditions that the other will not accept as a precondition

The PA rejecting Netanyahu's preconditions isn't rightly equivalent to setting preconditions of their own.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
His offer talked about what would be preconditions.

I quoted is statement that stated no preconditions.

Are you incapable of identifying that as the doublespeak which it is?

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
It sounds like both sides demand preconditions that the other will not accept as a precondition

The PA rejecting Netanyahu's preconditions isn't rightly equivalent to setting preconditions of their own.

The justification that the PA used for rejecting identified what they considered had to happen before talks would resume.

That seems to be pre-conditions.

Both sides have stated what needs to happen before talks will work.
So again we get nowhere. Israel has a slight wisker edge in that they proposed something first after Obama's speech.

But nothing is changing and the status quo will still be in effect.
The concern would be that statement from the PA rep

A senior Palestinian negotiator called on Obama to intervene to force Israel to abide by previous interim agreements that include freezing settlement activity in the West Bank. The alternative, he said, was violence.

How much are they going to hold Obama at fault and how much do they really expect Israel to do? What cirterea before the PA escalates the cycle of violence. They have now already put the world on notice.

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
The justification that the PA used for rejecting identified what they considered had to happen before talks would resume.

That seems to be pre-conditions.

What specificly are you labaling as PA preconditions?

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
The concern would be that statement from the PA rep

A senior Palestinian negotiator called on Obama to intervene to force Israel to abide by previous interim agreements that include freezing settlement activity in the West Bank. The alternative, he said, was violence.

How much are they going to hold Obama at fault and how much do they really expect Israel to do? What cirterea before the PA escalates the cycle of violence. They have now already put the world on notice.

That isn't a statement, it is a paraphrase, and you came up with the insinuation that the PA would escalate violence on your own. It seems far more likely he was simply pointing out the fact that stalling will lead to unrest amongst militants, which should be obvious to anyone paying attention, but important to note all the same.