Why does krauthammer hate obama

The Security Council just declared the territories legally Palestinian — without the Palestinians having to concede anything, let alone peace. The administration claims a kind of passive innocence on the text of the resolution, as if it had come upon it at the last moment. We are to believe that the ostensible sponsors — New Zealand, Senegal, Malaysia and a Venezuela that cannot provide its own people with toilet paper, let alone food — had for months been sweating the details of Jewish housing in East Jerusalem.

This is a deception. Everyone knows that remote outposts are not the issue. Under any peace, they will be swept away. A second category of settlement is the close-in blocs that border Israel. America acquiesces to a declaration that, as a matter of international law, the Jewish state has no claim on the Western Wall, the Temple Mount, indeed the entire Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem. It refers to and treats it as an exclusively Muslim site, a deliberate attempt to eradicate its connection — let alone its centrality — to the Jewish people and Jewish history.

This Orwellian absurdity is an insult not just to Judaism but to Christianity. It makes a mockery of the Gospels, which chronicle the story of a Galilean Jew whose life and ministry unfolded throughout the Holy Land, most especially in Jerusalem and the Temple.

If this is nothing but a Muslim site, what happens to the very foundation of Christianity, which occurred years before Islam even came into being? It features the boycott, divestment and sanctions BDS movement, now growing on Western university campuses and some mainline Protestant churches. And it extends even into some precincts of the Democratic Party.

Especially dem activists. Well, where else is Jerusalem? Sri Lanka? But such cowardly gestures are mere pinpricks compared to the damage Israel faces in the final days of the Obama presidency. President Barack Obama might go to the UN and unveil his own final status parameters of a two-state solution. These would then be enshrined in a new Security Council resolution that could officially recognize a Palestinian state on the territory Israel came into possession of during the Six-Day War.

There is a reason such a move has been resisted by eight previous U. Under which the Palestinians get their state after negotiations in which the parties agree on recognized boundaries, exchange mutual recognition and declare a permanent end to the conflict. Land for peace would be replaced by land for nothing. Endorsing in advance a Palestinian state and what would essentially be a full Israeli withdrawal removes the Palestinian incentive to negotiate and strips Israel of territorial bargaining chips of the kind it used, for example, to achieve peace with Egypt.

The result would be not just perpetual war but incalculable damage to Israel. Consider but one example: the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem was destroyed and ethnically cleansed of Jews by its Arab conquerors in the war of President Barack Obama gave his grand West Point address defending the wisdom and prudence of his foreign policy, his government was urging Americans to evacuate Libya.

Libya, of course, was once the model Obama intervention — the exquisitely calibrated military engagement wrapped in the rhetorical extravagance of a nationally televised address proclaiming his newest foreign policy doctrine they change to fit the latest ad hoc decision : the responsibility to protect R2P. Nor for that matter do you hear much about Libya, now so dangerously chaotic and jihadi-infested that the U. State Department is telling Americans to get out.

It was a somber parade of straw men, as the president applauded himself for steering the nation on a nervy middle course between extreme isolationism and madcap interventionism. It was the rhetorical equivalent of that classic national security joke in which the presidential aide, devoted to policy option X, submits the following decision memo:. Not even Senator Rand Paul would withdraw from everywhere.

In reality, nobody is. Note: not boots on the ground. Same for Syria. It was Obama, not his critics, who went to the brink of a military strike over the use of chemical weapons. From which he then flinched. Critics have been begging Obama to help train and equip the outmanned and outgunned rebels — a policy to which he now intimates he might finally be coming around.

Three years late. Qusair, Homs and major suburbs of Damascus have already been retaken by the government. The battle has by now so decisively tilted toward Assad — backed by Russia, Iran and Hezbollah, while Obama dithered — that Assad is holding triumphal presidential elections next week. Amid all this, Obama seems unaware of how far his country has fallen. He attributes claims of American decline to either misreading history or partisan politics.