I encourage (especially) our Jewish members to opine about this observation by Josh Marshall:
…Netanyahu has made the de facto alliance between the Likud or what remains of the faction he owns (that part gets very complicated) and the US Republican party increasingly explicit. And that’s dangerous. Dangerous for all concerned but particularly for Israel. I wish Netanyahu and his government had a better sense of the toxic repercussions of mobilizing GOP proxies as cut-outs in this way. It should go without saying that the Israel-US alliance becomes more brittle as it becomes more clearly identified with a single US political party. And perhaps more than that, as it becomes more clearly identified with the ties between Netanyahu and US Republicans.
Eric Cantor, who was recently defeated in a party primary, is the only elected Jewish member of the Republican Party in the federal government. To say that it is dangerous for Israel to align itself with the Republican Party is the understatement of the year.
American Jews could not be more alienated from the Israeli government by any other conceivable decision.
As I just said on Twitter to Marshall, what goes unmentioned is that Democrats in both the House(99% .. probably) and Senate(100%) still continue to kiss Israel’s ass in every way possible.
Think gun control – resistance is futile and the Democrats know it.
But good for Netanyahu. There’s nothing like tying your future to a life preserver made of combustible material with the floating quality of plutonium. The strategy is stupider than it is tragic.
But if there was one way and one person to make the American community understand the clear difference between a Jew and being an Israeli, for everyone’s benefit, Netanyahu is your guy.
I think it is a serious mistake for Israel to rely on Republicans, the right wing cares about money for the rich and nothing else. http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-rights-israel-turn/ That said Netanyahu has personal relationships with many Republicans, including Romney, and that may color his view. Moe importantly,
Sam Harris has an excellent article on the current situation http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/why-dont-i-criticize-israel Hitler made very clear that he intended to kill the Jews before coming to power. Those who did not object either didn’t believe him, didn’t care or supported his goals. Hamas is clear that they will not negotiate, that they want to rid Palestine of all Jews and in fact want to murder all Jews. For those who support the Fascist dictatorship that is Hamas (one election does not make a democracy), do you not believe them, do you not care or do you actively support the murder of Jews?
Perhaps you have noticed that the current casualties are about 1000+ for the Palestinians (mostly women and children) and 50 Israeli soldiers. The Israeli army has put tank and missile rounds into hospitals, schools, and other areas of civilian gathering.
For the last 20 years, the Zionist entity has made Palestinians into 4th class citizens. The walls, the “price tag” movement, the stolen lands for new settlements – the entire Israeli state is a criminal enterprise at this time.
All this nonsense has been refuted so many times, I’m not going to bother. But the important thing is that you fall into the “agree with Hamas that all Jews should be murdered” camp.
Wrong about what side I am on. I do not support Hamas and the rocket attacks. But, as usual, the Israelis respond to the rockets by total force, disproportionate killing of women and children, firing on hospitals, and so forth.
I cannot imagine an approach MORE LIKELY to lose friends and influence than the current Israeli approach.
Ya’ll hid his comment now, but I must say I had him sized-up pretty well on the first encounter here …
HamasNetanyahu is clear thattheyhe will not negotiate, thattheyhe want[s] to ridPalestineJudea and Samaria of allJewsPalestinians and in fact want to murderall Jewsmost Palestinians. [Past three weeks the IDF murdered 1,100 Palestinians i.e. an equivalent of 65 9/11 attacks on the U.S. A blatant war of choice and Obama remains silent, restocks the bunker-busters GBU-39 and the Iron Dome intercept missiles. Obama is far worse than Bush on this issue – Oui] For those who support the Fascist dictatorship that isHamasIsrael ….Sam Harris is in conversation with himself and it’s a conflicting story. He doesn’t add anything to the political squabble between Israel and Palestine. To his benefit this desription in Wikipedia:
“Harris is a contemporary critic of religion and proponent of scientific skepticism and the “New Atheism.” He is
also an advocate for the separation of church and state, freedom of religion, and the liberty to criticize religion.”
Can Sam Harris have any chance to convince the Israelis and particularly Netanyahu he can’t have a Jewish state?
In the United States he can start by convincing the Republicans and the Supreme Court of the separation of church and state. On both arguments, Sam Harris has zill chance. Now someone with a practical sense of debate, please …
What Netanyahu really thinks a week ago and 17 years ago:
○ Netanyahu finally speaks his mind – July 2014
○ PM Netanyahu Statement to Knesset on Hebron Protocol – January 1997
See my diary – War Crimes by Moral Desolate IDF Soldiers of Golani Brigade.
I have a long-standing discussion with my parents about this. They’re old lefties in many ways (voted Lamont over Lieberman)–but they’re also old oldies. The Holocaust isn’t a historical event to them. It’s something that happened in their lifetimes, to people they know. And it happened to them, in some really deep ways (though not directly). I find it difficult to express how traumatizing it was for them (and, to a lesser extent, for me, as this shit gets passed down the generations). I know it’s a bit ghoulish to wave the flag of victimization with this stuff, but I also know that the Holocaust was one of the most formative events of their lives, and informs everything. Always.
Which is a longwinded way of saying that while they oppose many of Israel’s actions, they are also profoundly defensive of Israel in an ethnic/existential way. Which is why I keep trying this angle with them. I’ve told them many times that I think that Netanyahu (and more generally, the Israeli right) is the single greatest threat to Israel. They see that. A little. But not as clearly as they see the threat of more dead Jews.
Of course, they’ll be dead Jews themselves, all too soon. And the next generation has a very, very different relationship with Israel. That said, I don’t think this is completely, or even primarily, on Netanyahu. It’s been a long time coming. He’s just pushing it harder, faster, toward the endgame.
Anyone that fails to understand the horror of the Holocaust is barbaric. However, that was no excuse for trampling on the lives and homes and stealing the lands of the people that for centuries had inhabited the region of Palestine. They had nothing to do with the Holocaust, and therefore, should not have been forced to pay for those crimes against humanity and almost seventy years on continue to pay.
Those that also fail to understand the horror of what those in eastern Ukraine endured under the Nazi regime are also barbaric. Yet today they support the western Ukraine neo-Nazis waging war on eastern Ukraine.
I’m not talking about the horror of the Holocaust, I’m talking about the trauma. Very different things.
Understand, and trauma is probably a better word forthe memory of horrors that live on in the psyches of the survivors, relatives, and descendants. But it’s not unique to Jews. One difference is that victims don’t forget anytime soon who it was that brutalized them. It takes a long time for the memory to be extinguished and that’s if the aggressors don’t repeat their horrific acts.
Of course it’s not unique to Jews. I don’t think victims tend to be quite so judicious as you’re implying, though.
It’s tough to understand other people’s trauma, especially when that trauma leads them to do, or support, terrible things. Reminds me a bit of right-wingers who love highlighting crimes committed by blacks. We say, there’s more to the story than ‘blacks are disproportionately committing murders’, and they say, ‘that’s no excuse for killing.’ Which is, of course, true. And incomplete.
In terms of Israel and Palestine, or Jews and non-Jews, or Israel and the Arab states, there’s more than enough trauma to go around. Jews are killing children. There is no excuse for that. The fact that Jews were killed for a thousand years because of false accusations of killing children isn’t an excuse. The fact that a million Jewish children were killed within living memory isn’t an excuse, either. The fact that many Jews feel certain that if the situations were reversed, and the Palestinians had the military capacity to kill every Jew in Palestine, they’d do without hesitation and the world would tut-tut also isn’t an excuse. There is literally no excuse.
Those aren’t excuses, they’re just more nightmare facets of this conflict.
But my point isn’t about who is righter or who is wronger, who is better, who is worse. I’ve followed those arguments for decades, and never seen any positive results, except for the pleasure people (myself included) feel in staking out higher moral ground for themselves.
I’m just trying to respond to Boo’s point. Because maybe this ‘drifting apart’ of the right in Israel and the Jews in the US can be used to show people who are ostensibly (though not actually) ‘pro-Israel’ that being maximally hawkish and right-wing is a danger to Israel, not a defense of it. That is, if we can’t fight this trauma, maybe we can enlist it.
Except for the US, honestly can’t think of another traumatized people that when given an opportunity while the memories were still reasonably fresh (within a couple hundred years), didn’t direct their anger, usually with violence, at those that had traumatized them and/or their ancestors. (Mustn’t forget that Americans felt traumatized by 9/11; so, we destroyed Iraq that had nothing to do with 9/11.)
It was the root of the Yugoslav wars. It’s what the Iraqi Shias did after the US invasion and what the Iraqi Sunnis are responding to now. Traumas since at least 1947 is what lives in the Palestinians.
Jews that want to go back 2,000 years to claim ownership of “Greater Israel” conveniently leave out a lot of history. Native American populations have a much more recent and valid claim to North America than the Jews do to “Greater Israel.”
I think you’re overlooking the long and glorious human tradition of scapegoating pretty completely. Native American tribes didn’t always treat each other gently, in the wake of the European invasion. The Zulus didn’t direct all their ire against Boers. The Germans, traumatized by WWI, directed their anger at the Jews.
In terms of claims of ownership, I’ve heard it all, and I’ve never been sure what it’s meant to resolve. I think both sides have this fantasy where they hold up the One True Deed, and the heavens part. Not unlike a movie conceit where the great-great-great granddaughter of the person who ‘sold’ Manhattan discovers that the contract isn’t valid, so now she owns the whole thing!
Solutions aren’t as tidy as that. There’s one land. There are (at least) two claims. I was raised, as you can imagine, to think that the Jews’ claim is better: then I realized I didn’t care. It didn’t matter, except as a way to make myself feel holier than they. And I can’t even tell you how many times I’ve pushed back against the ‘Palestinian wasn’t even an ethnicity’ bullshit. Not even because I disagree, but because the only function of that statement–or of yours about ‘Greater Israel,’ which, btw, I’ve never in my life had an actual Jew say to me in person–is to make the conflict more intractable.
That’s the value of Boo’s question, I think. That it sidesteps the question that so many of us feel is of primary import–‘who is morally superior, and how do I align myself with them, so as to feel morally superior myself?–and gets to ‘does X action make peace more or less likely?’
You mean that Haaretz isn’t an Israeli newspaper? Perhaps they need some schooling on their reporting —
Although Eretz Yisrael HaSheleima does sound nicer.
I was speaking of what people that have been traumatized do later. And generally they fight back against those the perpetrated the violence on them. (The Zulu fought against their Anglo colonizers.) Real grievances and not those ginned up through scapegoating (along with religion, too often the rationale used to impose the original horror on some group).
wrt wars among Native American tribes:
“Scalping” wasn’t within their inter-tribal warfare repertoire.
South Africa, the Peace and Reconciliation Commission. That was its purpose.
Cultural trauma is in Gaza now too.
Ukraine is not a nest of neo=Nazis. That is Russian propaganda.
From my observation, most of the fascist wing in this country is supporting Russia against Ukraine. Now why would that be?
Could it have some relation to the fact that Ukrainian moves toward the west are supported by George Soros? Whatever you think of Soros, he is hardly a fascist. And the far right everywhere hates him. Meanwhile, there is no shortage of fascism in today’s Russia.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/05/21/fascism_comes_to_ukraine_–_from_russia_122700.
html
The true struggle between Ukraine and Russia is not about fascism as such. It is what the Russians call Atlanticism vs Eurasianism. In the early days of Putin, there was a big question about which way the cat would jump, but it is clear that Putin has come down decisively for Eurasianism.
JRead this:
http://www.jobbik.com/gábor_vona_euro-atlanticism_must_be_replaced_eurasianism
Eurasianism is supposed to be an alternative to the “Atlantic” power bloc of North America and western Europe. it is an alternative politically, and a lot of what they say may sound good in theory, but since they operate within the same world of contemporary global capitalism and mafia as the west, and is economically intertwined, the cultural alternative is mostly a facade — which is typical of fascism. I don’t mean they are not sincere, I mean (like the far right here) they cannot do what they say they want to do, or they are trying to do politically what cannot be done politically except in an “ends justify the means” manner, which is inherently corrupting.
And besides, the real basis of what Russia is trying to do with Ukraine is nothing more than good old Russian imperialism.
Regarding post WW2 fascism, I have read all the books and more that our friend Bob in Portland has recommended, and I take them seriously. But this does not explain what’s going on with Ukraine now.
Ukraine would be better off if it could work out a balance between Russia and the west, just like the old “nonaligned” countres used to do. But Russia doesn’t want to allow this. I have no illusions about the western bloc’s intentions either, but as I said, a balance would be the best thing for Ukraine.
Russia is playing this game badly (except for his domestic audience),because Putin is used to manipulating small countries and regions with weaker ties to the west. With Ukraine he seems to have bit off more than he can chew, especially with the colossal fuckup of the Malaysian airliner.
Nobody seems to be claiming that Ukraine is a “nest of neo-Nazis.” However they are a faction in western Ukraine just as they are in Greece (Golden Dawn). And people in eastern Ukraine are well aware of their presence and likely overgeneralize when they report that the missiles and bombs that are being fired and dropped on them from the Ukrainian military are coming from Nazis. That’s their historical and/or frame of reference for such an onslaught and not Russian propaganda. (How easy it is for us to forget the horrendous destruction and loss of life Russians experienced in WWII from Germany.)
Your second sentence is false. Putin was supportive of a state in eastern Ukraine that remained within a republic of Ukraine. Some of those in eastern Ukraine might prefer that the state be split — ala the Czech Republic and Slovakia — but appear amenable to a state within Ukraine.
Unlike you, I don’t know who downed MH17. But Kiev seems as interested in getting international crash investigators to the site as GWB did in getting weapons inspectors into Iraq in 2002-03. I note patterns and therefore, am naturally suspicious. Added to that in almost two weeks nothing concrete and new has been released from Kiev and DC. They’re either hiding something or playing a very dangerous game.
If so (and would quibble with characterizing it as “good old Russian imperialism”), at least they’re doing so with a country that is on their border and at various times was considered within its borders and not going halfway around the world to expand their empire as the US has been doing for over a hundred years. (The USSR had satellites and the US has client states in which we maintain US military bases which Chalmers Johnson detailed extensively in The Sorrows of Empire: Militarism, Secrecy, and the End of the Republic (The American Empire Project)
Soros supports a global currency. We’ve seen what the Euro has done to Greece and others countries and taking that global would be a worldwide disaster. So, pardon me if I’m not interested in what he has to say about Ukraine at this time.
“…Kiev seems as interested in getting international crash investigators to the site as GWB did in getting weapons inspectors into Iraq…”
You provide no evidence for this claim. In addition, the flight was international, which is one of the reasons that the demand to have had a forensic investigation of the downed plane was international, not just from Kiev. The opportunity to conduct that investigation is now gone; it is gone because armed militias opposed to the Kiev government have prevented investigators from free access to the crash site and have removed the black box and other portions of the plane. There is plentiful evidence for that claim.
These actions are most easily explained by this: Eastern Ukrainian separatist/independence militia members downed the plane, probably accidentally, and they do not wish for a forensic investigation to take place, because it could provide more definitive evidence that they were indeed responsible. The Russian government has provided most of the large arms the separatists have used, which creates an unhappy association for them. If they were not responsible for shooting down the plane, the actions the militias have taken since the shootdown make zero sense, unless they care nothing about the opinions of the nations who just lost many of their citizens.
Multiple sinful U.S. military and foreign policy actions do not change the facts of this case, nor do they reverse the most likely conclusions we draw from those facts.
Kiev rejected a cease fire proposal after the downing of MH17. Malaysia/Malaysia Air officials had no difficulty securing the black boxes that were the custody of the separatists. Various people, including reporters, had no difficulty getting onto the site of the crash. But don’t let me interrupt your ingestion of western spin and propaganda and demands that others supply facts when you and the US and Kiev governments supply nothing.
Where are the Kiev ATC transcript tapes? Why was MH17 not on the current usual flight path over eastern Ukraine? And let’s not forget that in approving and collecting fees for overflights, Kiev is responsible for the safe transit of those airplanes.
Why did the separatists take the black boxes? Why were they not given to Malaysia right away, and why were they taken out of the area for a lengthy time afterward?
I’m disinclined to swallow whole U.S. claims; I’m not swallowing some of them. But, you know, it is possible that the best evidence is not deceiving us here, that a militia screwed up and brought down a passenger jet, and that Russia’s arming of the militias was a big miscalculation.
Also, this doesn’t smell to me like Iraq 2002-03. Among the many differences is that there is no drumbeat to war. Hell, Obama is sensibly resisting sending large arms to Kiev. He’s doing this while trying to honor the security agreement the U.S., Great Britain and Russia gave to Ukraine in the mid-’90’s in order to get them to eliminate their nuclear weapons, an agreement which Russia appears to have violated by their taking of Crimea and their arming of the separatists. I note that that agreement hasn’t come up in the discussions here.
David Stockman (no liberal nor member of the facist wing in this country) offers a rational current events and historical overview in On Dominoes, WMDs And Putin’s “Aggression”: Imperial Washington Is Intoxicated By Another Big Lie
Marie,
You are right that the fascists are ” a faction in western Ukraine just as they are in Greece (Golden Dawn)”. — A very small faction. Whereas according to Russia and the separatists in eastern Ukraine, they are running the show. That is false propaganda.
In reading your characterizations of “western Ukraine” and “eastern Ukraine”, I do not get the impression that you have a clear idea of what you are talking about. The separatists are confined to the Donbas region of eastern Ukraine, and seem to be a minority even there, just as the fascists are pretty much confined to a fairly small region of western Ukraine (Galicia and environs), which had long been part of the Austro-Hungarian empire and then Poland and only annexed to the USSR after WW2. And they too are a minority even there.The great majority of Ukrainians do not belong to either extreme, nor does the government.
Nobody, Kiev, Amsterdam, USA, have released anything substantial about the airplane because, thanks to Russia and the separatists, it is very difficult to investigate the site, especially in terms of wreckage of the airplane. The idea that Kiev is not interested in such an investigation is pulled out of thin air.
That the Kiev governments have been corrupt and inept is a statement with which I and, I am sure, practically everybody in Ukraine would agree. I am not an expert on Ukraine, but having been there several times, I would never dispute this. It’s a good part of how they would up in this mess.
Finally as to Soros, you only corroborate my point. Soros is an internationalist, NWO type, the exact opposite of a fascist.
Eastern Ukrainians vote for self-rule in referendum opposed by West — May 11, 2014. People in eastern Ukraine that want some degree of autonomy from Kiev don’t seem to think they are in the minority. So, I cite another fact that you dismiss with what?
I didn’t say that Kiev was didn’t want international crash investigators on the MH17 site; only that their behavior seemed to suggest that. They did reject a cease fire to allow a safe investigation. They also released a fake audio hours after the crash that they claimed was “separatists” confirming that they had shot down the plane. Kiev has not disclosed why MH17 was way off the current usual overflight of eastern Ukraine. And didn’t the “separatists” cooperate with Malaysia/Malaysia Air officials in handing over the black boxes? (And they weren’t tampered with before the hand-off.) How much does it take before skepticism sets in for you?
Apparently far more than it does me and several former intelligence officials: Obama Should Release Ukraine Evidence.
In international situations with murky facts and heavily laden with US spin and propaganda sans facts, I use the exact same fact collection and analytical skills I used when Bush/Cheney were making their case for war and when Obama/Biden/Kerry were ready to drop bombs on Syria over false claims. And always hear others saying to me that “you don’t know what you’re talking about.” Maybe I don’t, but for some bizarre reason in real time I tend to get closer, often much closer, to the truth than others do.
“I use the exact same fact collection and analytical skills I used when Bush/Cheney were making their case for war and when Obama/Biden/Kerry were ready to drop bombs on Syria over false claims.”
So do i. Only in this case I come to a different conclusion.
Regarding the fake audio, if it is indeed fake, one of the oldest disinformation tricks in the book is to release a fake but all-too-convenient document to an intelligence agency. When they take the bait, the agent provocateur then points out that the “evidence” is an obvious fake, based on crude errors such as an impossible date.
This is exactly what was done in the Niger uranium forgery. In that case the alleged event never happened.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niger_uranium_forgeries
In a more subtle way,the reverse was done with the release of the “W” Bush national guard records (“Killian document”) that destroyed several careers, including Dan Rather’s. More important, it was successful as disinformation, since the entire dossier is now considered a forgery, just because it was alleged to have been typed later, even though it is all corroborated in authoritative National Guard records.
What I don’t understand is why anyone would assume that the CIA is the only outfit that does this kind of stuff. The czarist Okhrana, which was responsible for, among many other dirty tricks, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, one of the most successful provocations of all time, were masters at this sort of thing long before Allen Dulles was out of elemntary school.
Did Josh Marshall neglect to check the news yesterday?
Thousands Descend on Manhattan to Rally for Israel
Is Chuckie Schumer a Republican now or just a Democratic shill for the 51st state (taking over from Lieberman)?
Why would you think that a war against the Palestinians wouldn’t elicit the support of a goodly amount of American Jews?
They aren’t immune from the “my ethnicity/religion right or wrong” mentality.
The state of Israel made a decision that most American Jews didn’t support, but they’re in a bind now because no one wants to accept the consequences that would come with a cease fire.
It’s a tragedy that I have been predicting for more than half a decade.
Didn’t say it wouldn’t. But it’s as irrational as USians supporting a war against Iraq for 9/11. Or maybe only criminal as Jews stole and continue to steal Palestinian land and water and USians covet Iraqi oil.
btw – First I was responding to Marshall’s claim that Bibi-Israel are aligned with the GOP. Whatever the tiffs between Bibi and Democratic politicians, when push comes to shove the latter always support Israel unconditionally.
Second, this rally took place while the slaughter in Gaza continues. It’s as morally repulsive as when white Americans showed up for KKK lynchings. Or white Americans cheering for the internment of Japanese-Americans. Or the German American Bund rally of 1939.
But at least then, US politicians and religious leaders weren’t out there supporting the German American Bund.
You are right, and this is exactly what propels Bibi and other right-wingers to keep Israel in perpetual crisis mode. So that if there is any danger of a crisis being mitigated or even solved, they will have to make it worse or instigate a new one.
If you would ask most American Jews if Bibi is right, they will say that he is wrong.
But if they think Israel is in danger — and Israel seems to be perpetually in danger — they will come to its support.
I’m sorry to sound cynical, but I have noticed a definite uptick in the activity of schnorrers for Israel over the last two weeks. Can’t miss this money-raising opportunity.
http://972mag.com/dear-liberal-american-jews-please-dont-betray-israel/35396/
I don’t think this is so complicated to understand. These are universal human follies, not unique to any particular ethnic group.
>Is Chuckie Schumer a Republican now
uh … yes … he’s a monster and has been for years – net neutrality for example
Officially he’s among the elite Democratic politicians, and if his positions aren’t in sync with a majority of Democrats then the latter are either ignorant or blinded by partisanship.
I agree with you. The guy frustrates the heck out of me. He also scuttled efforts to treat carried interest as regular income rather than capital gains. At the same time, the world isn’t black and white. There are times he’s a valuable member of the blue team.
It’s certainly an opportunistic alliance, but really, they are at analogous points in the tightening spiral of demographic extremism. It’s synergy.
As for a congress voting in lock-step to give blind support to Israel, some of the smarter politicians might ask themselves where they see this going? Let’s assume some have at least caught on to the idea that Israel has rejected, permanently, any thought of a two-state solution. That the “peace-process” is simply a noxious fig-leaf for ongoing war crimes, the perfume on the rotting corpse. That being the case, where is this going? Where does the logic of the Israeli position lead to? We already have prominent officials calling for the liquidation of Gaza. And from their perspective, it makes perfect sense. At this point, the smart question is, where else could Israel possibly go? At best, the current massacre in Gaza is the status quo, which is abundantly clear. But there are millions of Palestinians. Some massacres every few years won’t do the trick.
“American Jews could not be more alienated from the Israeli government by any other conceivable decision.”
This is coming from a 62 year old BAD JEW. I am the one who is proud of my religion, but don’t think I need to beat the drum for it.
The ONLY reasons Republican’s give a poop about Israel is
so their boy JESUS can rerise, or whatever it is he is supposed to do, as long as there is an Israel. OH, and US NEOCONS get to fight another war on some other country’s land.
Cynical enough? And while I am on FIRE:
The only way for Israel to peacefully survive is the TWO STATE Solution.
America currently has a minority becoming the majority
population. OUR minorities don’t HATE America.
As a single country, Israel’s minority will soon become the majority, and the majority of the current minority HATES Is rael, and their aint no more powerful HATE than Religion!
You WANTED comments from Lonsmen. You got one!
FINAL TRUTH: America is DOOMED as long as Republican LEADERS HATE Obama more than the love MY country!!
I have found that JEWS and Republicans TRANSLATE the BIBLE differently, especially when it come to who IS your fellow man is, and regarding the way Jews and Republicans treat those less fortunate!
I long ago came to the conclusion that the religious beliefs of Republican Jews, Catholics, and Protestants, at least in terms of social and foreign policy, had a lot more in common than these religions are traditionally thought to have.
I also notice that Republicans tend to hold their partisan beliefs as matters of faith rather than reason.
I think I see a pattern here.
Our minorities have kept the faith with the “America that has never been but must be”. But I often wonder how.
I have also found that JEWS and RepublicansTRANSLATE the bible differently, especially the parts of taking care of others, who is Human, etc.
It is extraordinarily foolish for Bibi to align himself with the GOP for oh so many reasons: they are a party in decline and will be gradually less useful over time; his support for the GOP greatly antagonizes the Democratic President of the US and further strains already strained relations; and it alienates American Jews, three-quarters of whom are Democrats.
And yet, viewed through another lens, it makes such perfect sense. The Israeli right (and the small but vocal Jewish-American right) continue to play for an “endgame” that they cannot possibly have: peaceful and permanent control of the West Bank and Gaza. Anyone with an ounce of sense or perspective can see that that ain’t. Gonna. Happen. Ever. And yet they cling to their fanatical, ideological hope. Kind like the American right wing, desperately clinging to their fading hope of a small government, Darwinistic, socially-conservative country that just ain’t. Gonna. Happen.
Basically, they are co-illusionists. They belong together.
I guess I will be the one to say it;
The vast majority of Americans don’t give a flying fu@k about the Palestinians. As far as most are concerned, the Israeli’s could level the whole Gaza strip, and salt the ground. Just ask around your work place, or go ask people at the park. Sorry Marie and Oui, THEY DO NOT CARE. They bunch the Palestinians in with every one else in the Region not a jew. To most they are all just Arabs.
What this means is that there is no downside, and absolutely no cost at all, for any politician to back Israel completely and totally. Back the Palestinians and you get called an anti-semite. Back the Israeli’s, you get re-elected.
A few days ago a member on the site compared the American Indians to the Palestinian situation. I thought that was an excellent analogy. At that time 90% of American’s did not give a fu%k about that, and actually supported genocide to take their land. All most needed was one or two stories about scalping. It did not matter (nor did they hear about it) that the white man started it all. America’s are not changed all that much.
I hate to use republican memes, but what would happen if the drug cartels started firing rockets from Tijuana into San Diego? How long would the POTUS wait, if the Mexican government did not stop it? A week? I bet a week. 10 rockets, maybe. Then we would send in the marines and flatten the place, salt the earth, and enforce a permanent over fly zone. 90% of Americans would be supportive. Nobody would care what came before, or what the causes were.
Example; Fallujah, Iraq. There was no excuse for what we did there.
You are all just talking to yourselves. Part of the 3% that gives a fu%k. Go ahead, make yourselves feel better. Feel superior. But the Palestinians are doomed. They are not getting a homeland.
No one cares. So why should our politicians?
.
Might they get a homeland if the message is, ‘A Palestinian homeland is a prerequisite of long-term Israeli security?’
I guess I should define what I mean by ‘homeland’. By that I mean a self governing state with defined borders, that has an ability to defend itself, and has the normal international rights to create its own air force, navy, and army.
The Palestinians are never getting that. And if you think them getting that would increase Israeli security, you are delusional. Israel might eventually agree to something, but it will only involve a ‘state’ that Israel can invade at will. Think the book ‘Dune’. Maud Dib said “The one who controls something, is the one that can destroy it’.
Israel will only agree to something it can destroy.
And right now, most Americans agree with that.
.
‘Ability to defend itself’ against whom? Israel? The US can, and has, invaded a number of states at will, on any number of pretexts, but that doesn’t make them non-states. If a homeland requires military parity with the Israelis, then I agree. But I’m not sure it does.
How about “a Palestinian homeland is a prequisite for ANY ongoing US aid to Israel”. That’s the elephant in the room. We – all of us – are PAYING for apartheid.
Of course it’s analogous and many have been stating so for decades. However, the analogy lacks historical context. The most egregious acts against native populations in the US took place in the 19th century. What was the literacy rate back then? What were the means of communication? How robust was the reporting of news? There was also a lot of land. None of that excuses the genocide committed against those native populations, but “we didn’t know” was more plausible. And let’s not forget that at that time, a large segment of the US population did look upon slavery as an abomination. One that should not be allowed to continue.
None of those excuses can plausibly exist today wrt to the Palestinians.
If there had never been anyone anywhere to point out the immorality of individuals and governments feudal societies and monarchies would continue to rule. Glad Harriet Beecher Stowe didn’t listen to naysayers like you during her time.
Quite high for the times, in fact;
http://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/literacy-rates
.
Increased rapidly in the 19th century, but those numbers look suspiciously high considering educational attainment back then. Also that 14% of Americans today can’t read. Functional illiteracy remains high and would have been higher in the 19th century considering how few years of schooling most children got.
However, there is a correlation between more education and less violence towards Native Americans. Although the latter would also indicate that their were fewer native inhabitants on fewer lands that whites had yet to steal.
If you do not believe the numbers are correct, provide a link. If you believe there was a connection between higher education and less violence towards native americans, provide a link. You want both sides, that the average Anglo American was uninformed (illiterate), yet the educated elite was sympathetic to native Americans. However, that would be odd, because the policies of the time were driven by the political elite and the military command, which was certainly near 100% literate. I’m sure you will say ‘no I meant 1840!’ Well, we invaded Mexico to take THEIR land. A war that is generally considered one of the least defensible in our history, right up there with the Spanish American War. Both of which were completely supported.
You take exceptions with my comments, and call me a ‘nay-sayer’, yet you don’t actually dispute them with anything. You seem to take the position that my perceived negativity is the problem, and believe a stereotype of early Anglo Americans being uneducated country bumpkins somehow refutes everything.
The current and official US literacy rate is 99%. Yet, 32 million Americans can’t read.
Would you like to argue that measuring literacy in the US in the 19th century was more thorough and complete than it is today?
I very specifically said that there was a correlation between literacy and violence towards Indian. Wouldn’t be unreasonable to consider a causal relationship (not much different from lower birth rates as women are educated), but that’s far from stating a causal relationship which I didn’t. And if that wasn’t clear enough for you, I also added that the reduced violence towards natives during the 19th century may have reflected the decimation of that population and the lands they held.
Thomas Jefferson was very empathetic towards native Americans, but that seems to have been formed more from observations than his being an “educated elite.” Not that I used the term “educated elite” or ascribed a higher moral sensibility or values to those in that class. However, that period of time was also “The Age of Enlightenment” and one hardly needed to be an “educated elite” to be familiar with such reasoning. Lincoln wouldn’t have been considered an “educated elite,” but he opposed the Mexican-American War. Whereas, the Mormons, one of the Great Awakenings religious sects, engaged in killing Indians.
Do you deny that “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” didn’t influence Americans, specifically in the north, to oppose slavery? (It was also written to be read aloud because functional literacy wasn’t that high.)
I made no claim that literacy reduces wars because it doesn’t. “Educated elites” find all sorts of reasons to go to war. However, an uneducated, more specifically poorly educated, populace helps them recruit cannon fodder.
Shorter version…you got nothing to support what you say.
.
Nalbar – You”re cynically fine with supporting a regime that is – who are we kidding? – profoundly evil and the worst single enemy the US has in the world today.
All of your bravura is based on the idea that world opinion will not turn against Israeli apartheid. This is the whole point of Booman’s original post – that the GOP is becoming fatally-aligned with policies that will not stand the historical test of morality – and that they’ll pay for this electorally – if dems can succeed in downplaying their own culpability for this atrocity.
Look nalbar, oh great realist, we get that the cards are stacked … TODAY. How can you be so sure that they will continue to be stacked? Consider South Africa. Consider my gay marriage analogy. Public opinion changes and can do so quickly and unforgivingly. There have been many many MANY evil governments that have seemed invincible – including the one that shall not be mentioned – and they all went down – hard – eventually. Israel is be despised by the majority of the US eventually – what are the ramifications for the GOP? – that’s where this thread began.
Israel WILL BE despised by the US majority eventually.
Certainly true for me, although a small number of my more conservative friends are still sympathetic to the Netanyahu government. This is a real shame for Israelis, too, because I know a lot of good people there. It goes to show that most countries can’t get away with electing GW-level dipshits without facing serious repercussions.
Until about 100 yrs. ago, it was common practice for nations with better weapons to exterminate/enslave their weaker neighbors, take the land, consolidate, and move on to the next weakest neighbor. It was Darwinism on a world politics level. As pointed out, it’s what we did here, over and over. Leaders who did this were revered and considered great strategists and warriors.
Then – VERY recently – the world began to develop a conscience. All of a sudden the thinkers of the world began to embrace the idea that it’s not okay to exterminate and/or enslave a weaker neighbor just because you can, and you’ll profit from it.
Israel hasn’t quite gotten the message on this recent trend. They have the military capacity to annex Gaza, the West Bank, and why stop there? Syria, Iraq, Kuwait would be a sweet prize … Once they controlled all the oil, things would really start going their way. And in a pre-WWII world, that’s what they would have done. The map would be redrawn with huge swaths of the Middle East becoming part of Israel.
Netanyahu is like a frustrated modern-day Attila the Hun. He’s reading Game of Thrones instead of the morning paper. He’s got the weaponry to conquer his region and if not for these annoying modern whiners, he could do it with a lot less headaches. But whiners or no whiners, he still intends to do it as best he can, inch by frustrating inch, using negotiating techniques when he could be using bombs. The GOP of course is loving it vicariously. They’re still furious that their own plans to annex Iraq, Syria, Cuba and Iran worked out so badly.
You make some very good points. International law changed profoundly after WWII upon the founding of the United Nations. We often fail to live up to the new standards, but the standards remain.
Israel has been trying to play by the old rules since it was founded. It’s alliance with the U.S. has allowed it to get away with so much. That and the basic self interest of other states that want to trade and cut the odd deal with the Jewish state.
As recently as WWII, and even Vietnam, the firebombing of entire cities was not considered a war crime and was something the US did as part of its normal military strategy. This type of slaughter of civilians is now rightfully considered profoundly immoral.
Israel’s actions need to be judged by 2014 standards of morality, not by 1940s standards.
I’m not sure I get your point. I do understand that the first part is not intended as a direct comparison of what is happening in Gaza. So I have that.
But what 2014 standards of morality are the Israeli’s in violation of? I mean, not individual standards, but international standards of conflict. By most war standards what Israel is doing is pretty tame. I know that sounds disgusting to you, but look at it as it is…..they are not shooting airlines out of the sky. They are dropping leaflets, as ineffective as that can be in a shoebox like Gaza. They are not dropping poison gas on anyone. It is a virtual shooting gallery, but most wars these days do seem to be big guys against little guys.
The Palestinian’s ARE firing rockets into Israel. Certainly that is something that most countries would have to react to. Does that fit into some sort of morality?
Four months ago the Palestinian’s were lobbing rockets into Israel. No reaction. Three months ago the Palestinian’s were lobbing rockets into Israel. No reaction. Two months ago…. etc.
So I have a serious question…. what is the response that would be appropriately moral to a neighbor lobbing rockets into a country?
.
Can’t tell if defending Israel, or just JAQ’ing off.
If you cannot answer the question, just say so.
.
It’s a red herring of a question, dude. If you want the rockets from Hamas to stop, you stick to your 2012 cease-fire agreement; an agreement which Israel broke, repeatedly, yet Hamas has kept and even formed a police unit to monitor and stop rocket attacks.
Meanwhile, the West Bank has been non-violent and relatively peaceful, and what do they have to show for it? Nothing, just more settlements.
“Most countries” aren’t occupying and putting up an economic blockade that prevents building materials and things like seeds from entering the territory; “no country would tolerate this” is a distraction.
Further still, under international law, Gaza has the right to resist, including taking up arms.
Are Hamas Rocket Attacks Illegal?
In other words, Israel has one response: end the occupation. That is what it can and should do. Any other response is obfuscation.
You answered.
In your opinion (and according to international law) the Palestinian’s have every right to fire rockets into civilian areas of Israel.
Do I have that right?
.
As detailed in the link, ambiguous at best, but there is an argument that their rocket attacks into civilian areas are also legitimate under international law and in the context of the occupation; whether they’re politically prudent or moral is a separate issue in my opinion, of which I will come down on the side of non-violence (though Finkelstein argues the rockets are moral). Of course, my coming down on the side of non-violence is completely privileged. I’m sitting on a bed in America partaking in philosophical wanking.
Anyway, if the occupation and blockade (an act of war, btw) were both lifted, this legal calculus completely changes.
Chris Hedges has also commented on the subject:
Link
A new analysis sully linked to (heh) purports to show that non violence has actually been twice as effective as violent resistance. Don’t sell yourself short.
Heh, I believe it, and I’ve long believed that. However, non-violent resistance also depends on your oppressors to have a sense of shame in what they’re doing. Does Israel have any shame? It’s unknowable if there was no mass violent resistance in the history of the conflict what the region and their society would look like, but given the recent flare up I’ve got to conclude that no, a large enough segment of Israeli society to matter has no shame (given recent polling, apparently Israel needs to be more violent).
Shooting a rocket towards a civilian area is inherently immoral. I suppose you could say that anyone who chooses to live in an illegally and immorally occupied region is an enemy combatant, but no – of course, the rocket launchers aren’t justified in what they’re doing. It’s very easy to see how they got angry enough to do it, but it’s a stupid, desperate and immoral act.
That said, nalbar, you’re being obscenely disingenuous to start the analysis at the launching of the rockets. But now that you’ve made your feeble point, please respond line by line to seabe – if you can, which you can’t.
Wow, did you ever get dropped out of order.
I did not mean to start an analysis with the rockets, but make a point that there is moral ambiguity on both sides. Israel committed original sin right after WW2, but now it’s all blurred together.
.
This comment at Americablog gets to the bottom of it, really:
These are all very good answers, thank you. I always love truthdig, I have no idea why I forget about them.
obsessive, I have no desire to ‘refute’ seabe, and anyway, you made my point very well by answering ‘of course it is immoral to fire rockets’ YOU refuted him.
But that truthdig article says a couple things that are very important;
I suppose my point in all my comments is that the Palestinian’s have lost. The firing of rockets is actually a sign of weakness, not strength. Whatever tactics they are using, or have used in the past (suicide bombings, for instance) are doomed to failure. At this point it does not matter much if Israel is wrong, in the same way it did not matter (and does not matter now) that we were wrong with our dealings with the american indian.
If you try to fight immorality with immorality the strongest will win.
.
And Obsessed, you seem to be trying to get me to defend Israel. I cannot.
But I live in the real world. In that world the Palestinian’s will never get what they desire.
They have virtually no support in American, and very little ‘safe’ international support. They are fu%ked, and nobody cares.
.
I think the Palestinians in general have a lot more international support than Israel does. When you talk specifically about Hamas, however, they are relatively friendless.
This is a recent development. Four years ago, they had a benefactor in Morsi’s Egypt and were getting massive support from Iran and Syria. But Morsi was overthrown in a military coup and the conflict in Syria became sectarian. The Alawites and Shiites on one side and Hamas and the rest of the Sunnis on the other. Hamas was expelled from Syria and lost their funding from Iran.
As part of the larger Muslim Brotherhood movement, Hamas doesn’t have support from any official governments other than Turkey and Qatar. And that’s tricky because Turkey is also part of NATO and was until very recently one of Israel’s best friends. And Qatar is host to one of our biggest air bases in the region. So, their loyalties (or, at least, interests) are divided at best.
Hamas was totally isolated and out of money when this conflict began. They had agreed to join a coalition government with their rivals Fatah despite the fact that none of their members were given positions of leadership. They were desperate.
I think Netanyahu decided to punish Hamas for a crime they didn’t commit specifically because he didn’t want them joining with Fatah and knew that they were weak and isolated. Egypt’s leaders are probably helping Israel locate Hamas members to kill. They are every bit as interested as Israel is in decimating Hamas. Jordan and Saudi Arabia probably don’t care either.
If I can play devil’s advocate for just a moment, it’s true that Hamas had been suppressing the rocket fire very effectively, but they were also building their stockpile of rockets, improving their quality, and building a maze of tunnels. The longer that went on unaddressed, the more the threat to Israel was going to grow.
It’s one more reason that the peace negotiations with Kerry struck me as bizarre. How can you negotiate a peace agreement with just Fatah and the West Bank when Hamas is in control of Gaza and is building up their arsenal to threaten Israel? But, then, Hamas was cut out at least in part by the insistence in Israel that they not be included.
In any case, what a lot of people are missing is that the Obama administration’s insistence on imposing a cease fire really amounts to an insistence that Israel accept total defeat in this war. That is a major shift in U.S.-Israeli relations, and it is a result of Israel’s failure to negotiate for peace in good faith.
Not so sure he refuted me when I said it wasn’t moral, so we’re not really disagreeing on the morality aspect in any true sense. I only said when it comes to the legal issues it is more ambiguous than many make it out to be.
However, the suicide bombings of civilian populations are unambiguously illegal under international law, occupation or not.
‘Philosophical wanking’. I like that.
I think what you said about sitting safe here in America is so true. It’s easy for people to condemn either side, or both (as I do).
Eventually, I would say in about 5 years, those rockets are going to become very accurate. They will get homers on them, and increase the range. Then suicide bombers will become unnecessary.
If I can see it, then they can see.
Israel might just find out what ‘unlivable’ means.
.
I should hit up Chris Floyd more often…I didn’t even see his post when I said what I said:
Link
Those “leaflets” are killing children, women, old people and a few armed (non-cmmisioned) soldiers in one of the most densely populated areas on the planet.
Josh Marshall makes a very good point. The vast majority of American Jews are liberal. Israel has the support of the conservative synagogue crowd and most of the orthodox too (although, originally, the orthodox were against the founding of Israel). Among reform and secular Jews, some struggle to justify what Israel does and some give up trying. I see more and more Jews recognizing that so much of what Israel does is not right. It’s a hard transition when you were raised on a steady diet of pro-Zionist propaganda (as was I).
I recall my 8th grade public school social studies teacher railing against the U.N. resolution that declared Zionism is racism. I believed her. I thought it was outrageous and proof of Jewish moral superiority over the rest of the world.
Now I look at it and think, “A Jew who’s never been within 5,000 miles of Israel has a right to return but a Palestinian who used to live there does not. Yup. Racism.”
Israel long ago chose to dance with the devil. I’ve no idea if they have an end game. They must. These are not stupid people. Quite the contrary. And yet their coalition is dying and their strategy leads to a dead end. Surely they must see that. What horrendous plan do they have up their sleeve? I shudder to think of it.
The end cannot be anything good, that is for sure. I just don’t think they have an end game. They want the land, the water, the oil off shore, even the damn olive grove across the valley. And if they cannot have the grove, they will by golly cut the thing down. The Israeli’s won’t even let the Palestinian’s have the fish out of the ocean. All water, all food, all fuel, all everything, must go through Israel.
‘What do we do now Jim, kill them all?’ is what Devil Anse Hatfield asked his uncle after they burned down the McCoy home, and killed a daughter.
Good question.
.
Well…some people still say the same thing about Dick Cheney. I’m sure they do have an “end game”, but that doesn’t mean that it’s rooted anywhere in reality.
Same end game as the US had in the West.
Same end game the whites had in South Africa.
Which actual end game goals are realized and come to pass in the Middle East is yet to be seen.
It really depends upon the depth of Israel’s commitment to long term apartheid.
I try not to comment much on the situation in the Middle East, for any number of reasons. It’s too damn depressing, my views tend to differ from those of most of the people here, and it is the nature of debates about Israel-Palestine issues that such discussions can only go on forever and never reach a resolution, only resulting in bad feelings.
However, since you asked the Jews here to comment on the specific question of the danger of Netanyahu’s identification with the Republican party, I’ll chime in.
I was thinking back to Abba Eban’s autobiography, which he wrote shortly after Jimmy Carter was elected. There was some nervousness in the Jewish community about what Carter’s policies would be, and Abba Eban tried to reassure his readers, saying that in his experience, since the founding of the State of Israel, relationships with the U.S. had always been best when a Democrat was in the White House.
The point is that American partisan politics and Israeli partisan politics have long been intertwined. And the allegiances have always been roughly that Labor Knesset members (like Eban) are more comfortable with Democrats and Likud and other right-wing Knesset members are more comfortable with Republicans. The allegiances tend to be reciprocal, as was evident when the perception in the extremely close 1996 election was that Clinton had all but endorsed Shimon Peres when he ran against (and lost to) Netanyahu.
So, nothing much is new in Josh Marshall’s observation, although perhaps things are becoming more polarized. I don’t think the transnational political alliances of whoever the Prime Minister is at any given time affect the support of Israel among American Jews who belong to the opposite party. I do think, in general, that younger Jews identify with Israel less than their parents, but I doubt this has much to do with Likud’s preference for Republicans.
Trauma from the Shoa is not universal and can’t be used as an excuse for today’s atrocities in Gaza. With the influx of Jews from the former Soviet bloc, a hardened group of people became part of the rhetoric in support of fascisme/nationalism in Israel. Some Israelis are saying the Russian-speaking immigrants brought prostitution, corruption and crime. Former Soviet Union (FSU) Immigrants: The Impact on Israel, Israeli Politics, and the Arab-Israeli Conflict [pdf].
In today’s cabinet, Netanyahu is the moderate voice losing out to settler extremist Naftali Bennett, Danny Danon, Liberman. The political choices made by Netanyahu in forming alliances were to guarantee any peace talks would fail. Obama, Kerry and Indyk should have known, but the U.S. put on a show of a ‘neutral’ broker they were not. Accomodating Israel to increase settlement building from Day 1 of Obama’s inauguration illustrates his failed leadership on the I/P issue. It certainly shows his lack of resolve in the most difficult conflicts in today’s world.
What Netanyahu really thinks a week ago and 17 years ago:
○ Netanyahu finally speaks his mind – July 2014
○ PM Netanyahu Statement to Knesset on Hebron Protocol – January 1997
What was Obama to do? He tried to curtail Netanyahu. He certainly voiced his displeasure. The Republicans (and many Democrats) in Congress pounced and immediately made clear he had no leeway. I’ve no doubt Obama would love to put the screws to Bibi.
“Israel has one response: end the occupation. That is what it can and should do.”
There it is – from seabe upthread – everything else stems from this singular crime. End the occupation – end apartheid – just freaking do it. This has been going on for DECADES. Why can’t the mealy-mouth US jump slam down the gavel and say: “NO – YOU CAN’T TAKE THAT LAND – GIVE IT BACK – GIVE IT BACK NOW OR NOT ANOTHER PENNY FROM US AND THE SANCTIONS START NEXT WEEK.” Why does this have to drag on and on and on? It’s so patently obvious that we’re on the wrong side of this.
And to get to the point Booman is really trying to make – the US politics point – it’s going to hit a tipping point, and yes, the GOP is going to once again find themselves on the wrong side of history. If you don’t think US public opinion can turn against Israel, look at a graph of polls on gay marriage over the last 10 years. Now flip it horizontally and change gay marriage to Israeli Apartheid.
Israel is dead weight. Cut them loose.