President Barack Obama Speech at Cairo University

That's a lot of wishful thinking Bahu. You give Obama way to credit. I don't agree with your idea that somehow the US is responsible for the lack of peace in the world. And I'm sorry to say that Obama will not be the one to bring peace or even start it, because you can not have peace with a group of people who's only solution to their problem is the destruction, elimination and complete annihilation of their enemies. Obama is weak and is making this country weak and Americans will pay with their lives for this weakness and then we will see just how much peace Obama will bring.

The speech was full of happy thoughts and no new ideas.

He asked Israel to make more concessions and didn't ask the Arabs to do anything. This cannot lead to peace. How could it?

Churchill's speeches brought peace because they pointed out what the enemy did and why we had to fight him. He did NOT just give in completely.

I honestly thought you were being sarcastic when I started your piece.   The US identity doesn't need redefining, my friend.  There is an adage in English that sums up Obama succintly..."Talk's Cheap."  There are many serious events looming over the horizon, when faced with real world crises we will catch a glimpse of the true King Barry.  There won't be any prior administrations to blame for his lack of experience, wisdom, and backbone.

This is far too alarmist and completely wrong in that Obama is not sacrificing US interests at all.

At least a beginning has been made.

I think you judge the man too harshly. Afterall, he is talking Peace with the Arab/ Muslim world after nearky 5 decades of overt and covert hostility. Let us see how it all pans out.

Again Obama deprecated the US on foreign soil. He stated how terrible the US has been to Muslims, yet failed to mention the US life's given for Muslim causes in the Balkans, Kuwait, Iraq, Somalia. He's basically accepted Iran as a nuclear power. And like his reverend and grandmother, he threw Israel under the bus. All he really accomplished was to give the extremists new hope. If I were Israel, I'd be preparing my citizens to go it alone. Perhaps were are now seeing the effect of 20 years of listening to Rev. Weight's sermons. The world will not become safer, just less prepared.

I thought he asked hamas et al to agree that Isreal has a right to exist and to stop killing Israelis?  Would that not lead to peace?

Hamas capitulating might lead to peace, if the PLO also give up their demand to destroy Israel. (I know Abbas and before him Arafat keep saying that they have, but their Arabic speeches say something different.)

But asking them to please play nice won't help a bit.

The thing that brought us closes to peace is the invasion of Iraq. It cut off the PLO's last powerful supporter and financier (apart from the western countries) and hence forced the PLO to become a client of Israel and the west.

Another thing that really brought us a bit closer to peace is Hamas' behaviour towards Egypt and Egyptians. Hamas are well-hated by Egyptians living at the border to Gaza and Israel.

What ultimately will bring peace is either a revolution in Iran or an Iranian attack that obliterates all the Jews. (If the Jews are dead, there won't be "peace", technically, since all the big conflicts will continue and become bigger and only the smallest middle-eastern conflict, the one in Israel will end; but the west won't hear of the other conflicts just like today the west doesn't hear of the other conflicts.)

And even more important than what he said: what will he do?

What will Obama do when Hamas do not listen to him? Will he finally stop financial aid to Gaza? The US and EU promised to give no aid to Hamas as per Israel's and the PLO's request, but ever since Hamas violently took control of Gaza, aid to Gaza has only increased.

And what if the Jews continue to be born and live in the West-Bank, an area designated "Jew-free" by the UN. What will Obama do then?

(I don't have to ask what Obama would do if Arabs continue to be born and live in Israel, since that has never been a problem like Jews being born in living in the rest of the middle east.)

And finally, not killing Israelis is not enough. Hamas should also be asked to stop killing supporters of the PLO, supporters of any other group, and Christians in general.

I still don't understand why the world screamed "Death to the Jews" when Israel killed 1300 people, most of whom terrorists, while the same world was quiet when Hamas murdered innocent Christians and dissenting Muslims totalling the same numbers.

Obama didn't even address that problem in his speech.

(He did, however, make it clear to Tom Brokaw in Germany that he rejects the media's attempt to compare Israel to Nazi Germany. But he doesn't seem to have much of a spine. He says whatever he thinks people want to hear in whatever country he is in. In Germany though people would have been glad to hear that Jews are Nazis. Takes away the guilt, especially the guilt of having been allied with the Palestinian Arabs during World War II.)

I think this is not quite true. Obama only stated certain facts and they do not add up to a deprecation of the US.

I think he should have mentioned how the US time and again give the lives of their own soldiers to save Muslims, like in Kosovo and Bosnia (from the Serbs), in Iraq (from Saddam and Al-Qaeda), and Afghanistan (from the Taliban and Al-Qaeda).

Then he should have said that the US gets nothing but hatred in return.

He should have said that there is indeed a war between "Islam" and the west and that there will be until "Islam" ends it.

Then he should have announced that he would withdraw all American troops from the Gulf and "Saudi-Arabia" as a positive signal towards Iranian expansionists.

He shouldn't even have mentioned Israel. It's the smallest conflict in the region, it deserves the least attention.

The rest of the speech should have focused on Darfur.

I still think that an African-American President should be the one who actually helps Africans for once. George Bush was fairly good about Africa, but Obama seems to forget the continent again.

This equation of war on terror with Islam must end as it only fuels more violence and counter violence. I do not know if Obama can make a new beginning, or that it is too late  even to try, but I do admit that he is making an effort and I say get on with it.

That's interesting term for the Arab attack on Israel with the goal of "throwing the Jews into the sea".

Who were the "Palestinians" back then anyway?

Funny how many folks think something is just starting now, with Obama. Where was the support in the past?

Well, I do hope he is not making a "new beginning". I was just getting used to the entire thing calming down after Bush took out Saddam, the PLO's biggest financial supporter, and ended the civil war in Sudan.

If Obama really restarts the conflict, we will be in for another few years after we have been so close to peace now.

Agreed. Peace always seems close, at least that is what every administration talks themselves into believing. I've heard the boy call wolf so many times, these speeches have no impact. I'm sure if nothing happens Arabs will feel doubly disappointed by the Koran quoting president, and relations will slip farther in their regard. Doesn't he realize their long term memory is only exceeded by the time they hold a grudge?

As for Israel, I can only imagine they haven't felt this alone since 1967. I believe if Obama wanted to visit the Arab countries ( I have no beef with that) he should have stuck directly with relations between the US and that particular country. Instead he fell directly into the trap (due to his lack of experience) Palestinian vs. Israelis debate. And. since Obama is incapable of saying anything that won't bring him applause or make people like him, he set the Arabs up for disappointment and damaged his credibility with an ally. He should keep his alter ego, "Mr. Popular" home before he damages international relations as badly as he accused the previous administration of doing.

I agree 100%, for the sake of the world and the generations to come; peace is needed.

An intyeresting set of issues are raised here.

It is not true that US does not have a fund of goodwill in the Arab world. The great asset of USA is the "soft ware" of American popular cukture and the entire Arab world raps and jives to music lifted from the USA.

Now when it comes to high politics and diplomacy things are different.

I do not think USA should get involved in Darfur. What is happening in Darfur is tribal warfare and nothing more. The interests of the "civilised world" are not affected by the crisis in Darfur.

Obama will not abandon Africa, but Africans must learn to pull themselves up and not expect the rest of the world to give out doles ans susidise their cruel, despotic tin-pot dictators.

Not now. Not yet. But if the Arabs are not stopped from killing hundreds of thousands of Africans, what will stop them from trying the same thing with us when they have the chance?

It is true that we are not Africans so when they come after the Africans, why should we speak up?

And then maybe they will come after the Jews next, when Israel falls, and the west will not speak up.

But what happens when they come after the west? Will anybody be left to speak up?

The issue here is that the rest of the world handed over Sudan to Arab rulers. we handed over millions of Africans to their murderers. It is our responsibility.

You know, you really sound like you have a thing against Arabs. Might try having a disclaimer? Otherwise you really come across bigoted.

*shrugs* Just making an observation, so don't take it personally, you know?

You should hear me talk about Germans in the context of World War 2.

I think Leauki's articles defending Islam the faith vs terrorism really speaks to the contrary. I'm not saying I agree (or disagree) with him but I don't see him as a bigot. Arab here is a catch-all term for nation-states, not a statement against anyone with Arabic ancestry.

Or at least that's what I'm getting.

That's pretty much it.

At some point it gets tiresome to add a disclaimer to every sentence. And I have seen lots of people refer to agents of the Nazi dictatorship in Germany during World War 2 as "Germans" without anyone ever thinking that hatred for Hitler's policies or ideology constitutes some sort of irrational anti-German bigotry.

Similarly "the Japanese" were America's enemy in World War 2, and "the Chinese" were enemies in Korea (despite the fact that the "Republic of China", i.e. Taiwan) was fighting on America's side.

Those who call it an "Arab-Israeli conflict" certainly don't mean to say that every single Israeli and every single citizen of an Arab country are involved in individual spit fights.

For what it's worth, my favourite Israeli politician is an Arab. And his views of "the Arabs" (i.e. the agents of Arab governments and their supporters) and what to do with terrorists (not the same as Arabs) are pretty much the same as mine.

(Incidentally, I am German and my views of what to do with German Nazis are pretty much those as well.)

Again, like I said, just making an observation. I already stand corrected and all, but not everyone will know about your articles.

That is a good point.

However, the world will at some point have to get used to the fact that one can speak about the Arabs like almost everyone thinks they ought to speak about Israel. The important difference is that the claims I make about the Arabs (i.e. agents of Arab nationalist regimes) are true.

There really is a genocide going on in Sudan. And there really exists slavery in Arab countries. It is not bigotry to point that out.

Usually, the way it works is that someone makes some claim about Israel and then complains that "criticism of Israel" is called "anti-Semitism", hence giving oneself permission to propagate whatever lie about Israel one happens to like best, since "criticism of Israel" isn't anti-Semitism. And voila, all the old stories about the Jews are back, packaged into a "it's not the Jews, it's Israel" package.

On the other hand, saying bad things about "the Arabs" is bigotry, even if the statements are true.

It is a fact that _the Arabs_, the same Arab League who criticise Israel for its "inhumane treatment" of the "Palestinians", commit and condone the murder of hundreds of thousands of Africans and the enslavement of Christian Africans. I think it is plain racism to ignore that fact when one decides to believe their claims about the evils of Israel.

Charles ain't afraid to point out the anti-semitism & hypocrisy of BO.