For a long time there has been an ongoing and uneasy debate about the power of Jewish/Israeli lobbyists in Washington DC. It’s uneasy because taking the position that groups like AIPAC have too much influence can quickly lead to charges of anti-Semitism. It’s ongoing because the extent of their influence is a legitimately contentious question. If there is a limit to their power, we may soon discover where it lies.
The powerful pro-Israel lobby AIPAC is planning to launch a major lobbying campaign to push wayward lawmakers to back the resolution authorizing U.S. strikes against Syria, sources said Thursday.
Officials say that some 250 Jewish leaders and AIPAC activists will storm the halls on Capitol Hill beginning next week to persuade lawmakers that Congress must adopt the resolution or risk emboldening Iran’s efforts to build a nuclear weapon. They are expected to lobby virtually every member of Congress, arguing that “barbarism” by the Assad regime cannot be tolerated, and that failing to act would “send a message” to Tehran that the U.S. won’t stand up to hostile countries’ efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction, according to a source with the group.
The thing about sending a message to Iran is that a lot depends on how the Iranians perceive the message. And, while we can influence how the message is received, we can’t really control that. Iran could easily misconstrue the message.
Plus, how Iran reacts to the Syria vote is not the end of the story. They might, on the one hand, believe there is less likelihood that America will take preemptive action, and on the other hand feel like America is freer to take on a new intervention because they aren’t bogged down with the Syrian morass. They might think America’s refusal to act in Syria has spooked the Israelis and made them much more likely to strike unilaterally.
I think you can make a case that America taking the decision not to intervene in Syria makes it more likely that Iran will face some kind of attack. Will Iran see it that way?
I don’t know.
As for AIPAC and other like-minded entities, doing a full-court press for this authorization and losing will do a lot of damage to their mystique. At least militarily, Israel has always put a lot of emphasis on maintaining a reputation for competence and capability that exceeds the reality. Making people think that you are more powerful than you really are makes them less willing to take you on. The same idea is behind a lot of the National Rifle Association’s strategy.
When your strength is tested and you lose, you lose some of that mystique and it makes the next lobbying effort more difficult.
I would think this to be an easy deal for them – Reid, Boehner and Pelosi are on board with the vote (McConnell is in a primary fight with the Tea Party and can’t officially give his blessing). I have to think the AIPAC effort is towards running up the score instead of trying to get it to pass. Does anyone have a ballpark whip count?
Sure:
223 against and 25 for.
If those are hard and fast positions then this should make for some interesting political theater – grab the popcorn…
Scary:
Syria and the American Apocalyptic Imagination: Isaiah 17:1 as “Evidence” of the End
That link was a tremendously wordy slog.
A straight forward explanation of the issue though, not talking about what it means can be found here:
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/09/syria-joel-rosenberg-damascus-countdown-magog
Well, will the Rightwing Noise Machine extensively report on the fact that the most powerful Israel lobbying organization is tryin’ to help Obammy get something he wants? Will the corporate press spread this little nugget far and wide and cause the war weary American schmoes to wonder what in the hell? Any chance the ordinary Murican becomes aware of who is helping pull the war strings? I guess we know the answer.
I still think this some heavy lifting and the outcome in the House will be up for grabs, even with AIPAC cash and threats.
Bombin’ and regime changin’ their Syrian shi-ite ally is hardly likely to help Iran’s moderates or incline the Ayatollah to give up or negotiate Iran’s nuclear program, whatever “message” nonsense AIPAC’s lobbyists spread in the august halls of our appalling Congress.
Well, I hope AIPAC fails. I now hope Obama fails with this war resolution and in embarrassing fashion at that. I haven’t rooted so hard for him to fail at something since he was willing to take the end pieces on the loaf to get a deficit reduction deal passed.
John Kerry, by the way, is walking sabotage for selling Obama’s war. I think he loses a vote in the House every time he opens his mouth.
.
He has changed face from hopeful to hopeless in a matter of months running State.
US News reports Lindsay Graham
Took a bit of jujitsu to get to the above from:
Or a hail Mary bomb he had to throw when confronted from an audience member by the fact that the US is funding al Qaida fighters in Syria.
Well it’s entirely possible Israel will just act unilaterally so that part is reasonable.
Under what war game scenario does Israel survive such a unilateral act of war?
Under what scenario did they attack Osirak or the Syrian weapons plant a few years ago?
Iran is even farther away and none of the countries there (Turkey? The Saudis?) would want Iranian troops marching through their territory so classic war might be unlikely. At the same time, the Iranian Syrian and Hezbollah proxies are tied up with the rebels. So while Iran would strike back, any strike would be limited at least for a time. But it wouldn’t surprise me if open conflict of some sort began.
Also, just because the US wouldn’t take part doesn’t mean the US won’t defend Israel like it always has.
The public wasn’t watching, much less watching with laser focus, when Israel struck those targets — and there was a delay between the bombings and public recognition of them.
Under the best case scenario, what does Israel gain with a limited strike on Iran? I suppose it would give them a read on whether or not the Muslims in their neighborhoods remain divided or unify.
Is this an Omen and what might it mean?
I just called the Congressional offices of my Senators (Udall, Bennet) and my Congressman (Tipton). I got through easily (too easily considering?) to staffers to discuss briefly my strong opposition to this proposed Syria fiasco.
I haven’t been a regular contacter of Congresscritters before and I wonder what others have to say about their calling luck and experiences, especially right now.
A fellow southern Coloradoan! Unfortunately my congresscritter is Lamebrain – even worse that Tipton.
True story – I met Tipton in 1976 when he was recently out of college and running the local GOP office and I was part of a high school group interview on KVFC radio in Cortez. His positions were conservative but rational then – kind of like the GOP then – although he was in Reagan’s camp during that primary.
Interesting take. I feel more threatened by the current Israel regime, and AIPAC for that matter, than I do by any of the various sides in Syria. If this weakens AIPAC’s power … but on the other hand, the NRA won when we thought they were getting humiliated.
TYPO: “a lot depends on how the Iranian’s perceive the message” – lose that apostrophe por favor!
Israel is leaning on their congressional stooges already no doubt. I can’t support the president. We are going to bomb the Shiites after we handed them Iraq. Empower radical Sunni groups who will increase their campaign against the Iraqi government. Syria and Iraq’s border is only a line on paper for the west. Both countries would have radically different borders had they been left to decide after WWI. To compound matters we let a religion, suffering from PTSD, create a country in Palestine. Israel drove the Palestinians from their homes in the Nakba. Zionism isn’t pretty.
Remember the “Domino Effect” arguments from Vietnam? How bad it was going to be if we didn’t kill two million Vietnamese. Vague arguments on why. On why bad, bad things will happen if we don’t join in the killing. Fuck this stupidity. Only Israel has an interest as this is on their border. They seem to think our military is their military.
Officials say that some 250 Jewish leaders and AIPAC activists will storm the halls on Capitol Hill…
I don’t know how many people will realize just how HUGE this number is. When I did a thesis on the NRA’s ILA (Institute for Legislative Action) in the early 1980s they had 10 full time lobbyists and that was considered massive for the time.
There really is no question that their influence on US politics and media is enormous. There are, for example, political positions and observations of fact regarding Israel-Palestine that are entirely mainstream and uncontroversial in most of Western Europe but which are literally never voiced in US Congress or mainstream US media. An automatic stop for all serious presidential primary candidates is AIPAC, where the candidates compete with each other to win AIPAC’s approval.
Morally speaking, I cannot think of a worse argument for killing people in another country halfway around the world that poses zero threat to us than that backers of a third country want us to send a message to a fourth country. Use e-mail, morons.
Don’t forget the BND:
http://spitfirelist.com/news/curveball-ii-is-the-bnd-german-intelligence-gaming-the-syrian-civil-war
-another-good-reason-not-to-intervene-in-syria/
OK this guy is an old Bush crony. I remember his wife was giving money to radical Sunni groups? After 9/11 this was a story as I remember. Bandar is a sleazeball.
“”Prince Bandar, while ambassador to the U.S., was used by the Saudi government to negotiate a wide range of arms deals around the world, which included the biggest arms deal in history, a deal called the al-Yamamah deal between the United Kingdom and Saudi Arabia worth 43
billion British pounds. Around six billion pounds of bribes were paid on that deal alone. Over one billion pounds of those bribes flowed through Prince Bandar’s accounts that were held in Riggs Bank in Washington, D.C., as it then was. Bandar describes a 15-minute conversation with then
British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, in which he says he told the prime minister that the Saudis had certain special needs, the prime minister said she fully understood that, and that was the end of the negotiation, the easiest negotiation he’s ever had for an arms deal. Prince Bandar has effectively acted as bag man on all sorts of international arms transactions going back to the Iran-Contra imbroglio of the Reagan administration, up until fairly recent times.”
http://m.democracynow.org/stories/13354
.
I hope the Jews lose.
“The Jews”, eh?
Now where have I heard that before?
You know that Congressman Grayson (D-Florida) is Jewish?
http://mondoweiss.net/2013/09/rep-alan-grayson-aipac-falls-to-the-wayside-when-the-public-weighs-in.
html
So you can go fuck yourself.