Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'75 Kissinger memo discounted Israel
www.washtimes.com ^ | May 27, 2006 | Calvin Woodward

Posted on 05/27/2006 5:08:11 AM PDT by Esther Ruth

'75 Kissinger memo discounted Israel By Calvin Woodward May 27, 2006

The United States reached out to hostile Arabs three decades ago with an offer to work toward making Israel a "small friendly country" of no threat to its neighbors and with an assurance to Iraq that the U.S. had stopped backing Kurdish rebels in the north.

"We can't negotiate about the existence of Israel," then-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger told his Iraqi counterpart in a rare high-level meeting, "but we can reduce its size to historical proportions."

A December 1975 memo detailing Mr. Kissinger's probing conversation with Foreign Affairs Minister Saadoun Hammadi eight years after Iraq severed diplomatic relations with Washington is included in some 28,000 pages of Kissinger-era foreign policy papers published in an online collection yesterday.

George Washington University's National Security Archive released the collection, drawn from papers available at the government's National Archives and obtained through the group's Freedom of Information requests.

(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...


TOPICS: Israel; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: israel; kissinger; memo

1 posted on 05/27/2006 5:08:12 AM PDT by Esther Ruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Esther Ruth

It does not "discount Israel" to call it a "small friendly country." It is simply the truth.


2 posted on 05/27/2006 5:16:54 AM PDT by iowamark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Esther Ruth

I think those words were interpreted in a different light by our oil masters than intended. Small friendly country to us means one thing, to an islamic it would mean submission to pan-islamism, i.e. extinction.


3 posted on 05/27/2006 5:39:58 AM PDT by gotribe (It's not a religion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Esther Ruth

Keep you bladders in working order at least until the day Henry is laid to rest.


4 posted on 05/27/2006 6:09:09 AM PDT by em2vn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Esther Ruth
You go through the entire words and works of any Israeli leader and you will find equally curious and cryptic statements towards the United States.

People who talk for a living, talk a lot.

If Jews and Israelis don't like or trust Americans or it's government, they should go get a better deal.
5 posted on 05/27/2006 6:45:26 AM PDT by Leisler (Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslim.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Esther Ruth

While there is nothing ourageous about Kissinger's statements regarding Israel it is part of his pattern of appeasing tyrannical regimes. He was a defeatist who believed the USA was on a downtrend and his job was to negotiate favorable terms with the tyrannies that would dominate us. His view prevailed until Reagan took office with the belief that America was superior and was the wave of the future.


6 posted on 05/27/2006 9:18:34 AM PDT by Honestfreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Honestfreedom

I think these disclosures are more outragous:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/26/AR2006052601926.html

As American troops were dying in Vietnman Kissinger told the chi-coms that the US would accept a communist government there.


7 posted on 05/27/2006 10:14:15 AM PDT by traviskicks (http://www.neoperspectives.com/gasoline_and_government.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: piasa
George Washington University's National Security Archive released the collection

National Security Archive's selective "document releases" at work again today.

8 posted on 05/27/2006 11:58:22 AM PDT by Fedora
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks

That shows what evil bas-ards Kissinger and Nixon were. They were sending kids to Viet Nam to be killed while knowing they had no real expectation of winning the war as long as the defeat took place at a time and place where it did not hurt Nixon's chances for reelection.


9 posted on 05/27/2006 12:07:49 PM PDT by Honestfreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Honestfreedom

I guess LBJ was a saint, and the democrat controlled congress never had anything to do with the war.


10 posted on 05/27/2006 12:14:16 PM PDT by gedeon3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: gedeon3

I am not a Democrat and certainly not a liberal. But I will not defend Richard Nixon who was probably one of the worst Presidents in the 20th century. He imposed wage and price controls, he started a load of new domestic problems (remember who created the EPA and affirmative action). He was not loyal to you and your beliefs and there is no reason for you to be loyal to him.


11 posted on 05/27/2006 12:22:18 PM PDT by Honestfreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson