[gandalf]

Allan and others, serious question here. What’s your take?

Does US helping to push for ‘progress’ (real or otherwise) on the Palestinian issue help us strategically with some of the other issues we face in the Middle East?

Here’s my instinct: Seems to me like an easy thing to do to trade engagement on the Israel-Palestine issue for strategic advantages elsewhere in the region. Not sure what we gain with hardline ‘fake-hands-off’ approach.

Would we get better traction with the moderates in the region? Would it help us with other regions, Europe for example? Ironically, would it give us more leverage in our relations with Israel?

Before the idealogues respond, US engaging does not mean US is responsible for peace between these two crazy peoples. Just means we use our weight and influence to try to broker peace. Might improve our standing in the world and add to our leverage.

Nor does it mean we have to succeed. Frankly, we don’t. But there seems to be some value in simply trying.

Mostly, just interested in views.

What, do we work for the State Department or something?

Best, G

[gandalf]

Allan and others, serious question here. What’s your take?

Does US helping to push for ‘progress’ (real or otherwise) on the Palestinian issue help us strategically with some of the other issues we face in the Middle East?

Here’s my instinct: Seems to me like an easy thing to do to trade engagement on the Israel-Palestine issue for strategic advantages elsewhere in the region. Not sure what we gain with hardline ‘fake-hands-off’ approach.

Would we get better traction with the moderates in the region? Would it help us with other regions, Europe for example? Ironically, would it give us more leverage in our relations with Israel?

Before the idealogues respond, US engaging does not mean US is responsible for peace between these two crazy peoples. Just means we use our weight and influence to try to broker peace. Might improve our standing in the world and add to our leverage.

Nor does it mean we have to succeed. Frankly, we don’t. But there seems to be some value in simply trying.

Mostly, just interested in views.

What, do we work for the State Department or something?

Best, G

[gandalf]

Allan and others, serious question here. What’s your take?

Does US helping to push for ‘progress’ (real or otherwise) on the Palestinian issue help us strategically with some of the other issues we face in the Middle East?

Here’s my instinct: Seems to me like an easy thing to do to trade engagement on the Israel-Palestine issue for strategic advantages elsewhere in the region. Not sure what we gain with hardline ‘fake-hands-off’ approach.

Would we get better traction with the moderates in the region? Would it help us with other regions, Europe for example? Ironically, would it give us more leverage in our relations with Israel?

Before the idealogues respond, US engaging does not mean US is responsible for peace between these two crazy peoples. Just means we use our weight and influence to try to broker peace. Might improve our standing in the world and add to our leverage.

Nor does it mean we have to succeed. Frankly, we don’t. But there seems to be some value in simply trying.

Mostly, just interested in views.

What, do we work for the State Department or something?

Best, G

[gandalf]

Allan and others, serious question here. What’s your take?

Does US helping to push for ‘progress’ (real or otherwise) on the Palestinian issue help us strategically with some of the other issues we face in the Middle East?

Here’s my instinct: Seems to me like an easy thing to do to trade engagement on the Israel-Palestine issue for strategic advantages elsewhere in the region. Not sure what we gain with hardline ‘fake-hands-off’ approach.

Would we get better traction with the moderates in the region? Would it help us with other regions, Europe for example? Ironically, would it give us more leverage in our relations with Israel?

Before the idealogues respond, US engaging does not mean US is responsible for peace between these two crazy peoples. Just means we use our weight and influence to try to broker peace. Might improve our standing in the world and add to our leverage.

Nor does it mean we have to succeed. Frankly, we don’t. But there seems to be some value in simply trying.

Mostly, just interested in views.

What, do we work for the State Department or something?

Best, G

[gandalf]

Allan and others, serious question here. What’s your take?

Does US helping to push for ‘progress’ (real or otherwise) on the Palestinian issue help us strategically with some of the other issues we face in the Middle East?

Here’s my instinct: Seems to me like an easy thing to do to trade engagement on the Israel-Palestine issue for strategic advantages elsewhere in the region. Not sure what we gain with hardline ‘fake-hands-off’ approach.

Would we get better traction with the moderates in the region? Would it help us with other regions, Europe for example? Ironically, would it give us more leverage in our relations with Israel?

Before the idealogues respond, US engaging does not mean US is responsible for peace between these two crazy peoples. Just means we use our weight and influence to try to broker peace. Might improve our standing in the world and add to our leverage.

Nor does it mean we have to succeed. Frankly, we don’t. But there seems to be some value in simply trying.

Mostly, just interested in views.

What, do we work for the State Department or something?

Best, G

[gandalf]

No Volvos in Yemen.

Only Buick. Buick is good.

Low gas mileage.

—

And on a different note, here’s something I want to see:

“Volvo, the official car of the Oakland Raiders”

I can see it already, big sign on the Coliseum ‘VOLVO’.

XC90 comes in black, right? Tinted glass, silver rims…

KPBS plates?

That would be bad-ass.

[gandalf]

No Volvos in Yemen.

Only Buick. Buick is good.

Low gas mileage.

—

And on a different note, here’s something I want to see:

“Volvo, the official car of the Oakland Raiders”

I can see it already, big sign on the Coliseum ‘VOLVO’.

XC90 comes in black, right? Tinted glass, silver rims…

KPBS plates?

That would be bad-ass.

[gandalf]

No Volvos in Yemen.

Only Buick. Buick is good.

Low gas mileage.

—

And on a different note, here’s something I want to see:

“Volvo, the official car of the Oakland Raiders”

I can see it already, big sign on the Coliseum ‘VOLVO’.

XC90 comes in black, right? Tinted glass, silver rims…

KPBS plates?

That would be bad-ass.

[gandalf]

No Volvos in Yemen.

Only Buick. Buick is good.

Low gas mileage.

—

And on a different note, here’s something I want to see:

“Volvo, the official car of the Oakland Raiders”

I can see it already, big sign on the Coliseum ‘VOLVO’.

XC90 comes in black, right? Tinted glass, silver rims…

KPBS plates?

That would be bad-ass.

[gandalf]

No Volvos in Yemen.

Only Buick. Buick is good.

Low gas mileage.

—

And on a different note, here’s something I want to see:

“Volvo, the official car of the Oakland Raiders”

I can see it already, big sign on the Coliseum ‘VOLVO’.

XC90 comes in black, right? Tinted glass, silver rims…

KPBS plates?

That would be bad-ass.

[gandalf]

Yeah, but you know what’s worse about the whole Islam thing, Allan? Apparently, they don’t allow VOLVOs. NO Volvos. Not allowed. It’s against Sharia law. They’ll impound it and chop off your ‘left’ nut.

With a scimitar.

Ouch.

XC90 is NOT worth your left nut, trust me.

Damn barbarians…

[gandalf]

Yeah, but you know what’s worse about the whole Islam thing, Allan? Apparently, they don’t allow VOLVOs. NO Volvos. Not allowed. It’s against Sharia law. They’ll impound it and chop off your ‘left’ nut.

With a scimitar.

Ouch.

XC90 is NOT worth your left nut, trust me.

Damn barbarians…

[gandalf]

Yeah, but you know what’s worse about the whole Islam thing, Allan? Apparently, they don’t allow VOLVOs. NO Volvos. Not allowed. It’s against Sharia law. They’ll impound it and chop off your ‘left’ nut.

With a scimitar.

Ouch.

XC90 is NOT worth your left nut, trust me.

Damn barbarians…

[gandalf]

Yeah, but you know what’s worse about the whole Islam thing, Allan? Apparently, they don’t allow VOLVOs. NO Volvos. Not allowed. It’s against Sharia law. They’ll impound it and chop off your ‘left’ nut.

With a scimitar.

Ouch.

XC90 is NOT worth your left nut, trust me.

Damn barbarians…

[gandalf]

Yeah, but you know what’s worse about the whole Islam thing, Allan? Apparently, they don’t allow VOLVOs. NO Volvos. Not allowed. It’s against Sharia law. They’ll impound it and chop off your ‘left’ nut.

With a scimitar.

Ouch.

XC90 is NOT worth your left nut, trust me.

Damn barbarians…

[Author]

Posts