In my latest reading of This Is Herman Cain, Herman Cain 
presents his perspectives on a variety of issues.  Cain criticized 
President Barack Obama's call for Israel to return to her pre-1967 
borders, which (I think) was Israel's borders before she got the West 
Bank and the Gaza Strip.  From this article,
 I gather that President Obama's idea is that the West Bank would be 
used for a Palestinian state, although Obama also believes that Jewish 
settlement in the West Bank should be taken into account when 
determining where the borders should be.
Cain's argument is that 
Obama's idea would imperil Israel and "enable Israel's enemies to lob 
weapons at them, as they did from Lebanon several years ago" (page 
132).  Cain also contends that it would embolden Israel's enemies and 
"destabilize the whole region" (page 131).  Moreover, according to Cain,
 we cannot afford to allow our relationship with Israel to erode by 
alienating her, for we may need Israel if we were to be involved in a 
Middle Eastern conflict (since "we would need its assistance militarily,
 in terms of being a conduit for supplies, fuel, and other 
combat-related resources"), plus we'd be sending a message that we don't
 support our friends.
But doesn't supporting Israel at the expense
 of the Palestinians alienate Arab countries that provide us with oil?  
Well, Herman Cain says that we should be energy-independent, so that 
takes care of that.  Still, don't we need Arab support for some of our 
Middle Eastern conflicts?  In Operation Desert Storm, we had some Arab countries on 
our side.
I'm not taking a firm stand on Middle
 Eastern policy, for I'm sure that I have much to learn about the 
situation.  I will say, though, that evangelical Zionism tends to upset 
me, for it presumes that God takes sides in this whole conflict.  Herman
 Cain does not go that route, however, for he presents secular arguments
 for supporting Israel.