« A Note on Economic Warfare - Richard Sale | Main | Analysis at NPR = ? »

23 October 2010

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

walrus

The problem for Israel, is that it yields to exactly the same temptation that has dogged adherents of Judaism for centuries.

...Always going one step too far.

I personally think it is to do with the literal interpretation of human events forced on them by the structure of their religion.

The goyim know that our laws are man made, fallible, and a curb on our worst instincts. We also know that ultimately the fabric of man made law will not stretch to what is demanded by Israel, at which point simple compassion for the Palestinians demands action, and to hell with AIPAC and the donors.

By coincidence, Catholic Bishops at a conference led by the Pope, have now demanded that Israel withdraw to its 1967 borders and implement a Two State solution.

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/10/23/mideast.catholic.bishops/index.html?eref=rss_latest

And befoe anyone accuses me of anti semitism, I learned this year that Four of my Jewish forbears were murdered in Auschwitz. It is amazing what parents keep from their children.

Clifford Kiracofe

Faux diplomacy and fantasy are the order of the day in US foreign policy elites per the Middle East and around the world for that matter.

Serious foreign policy is not possible it would seem under present political conditions in this republic.

Intelligence product, expertise of seasoned diplomats, knowledge of academic experts is irrelevant. The politicians and associated policy elites have their "globalist" agenda.

Thus intelligence product is "cooked" and authentic expertise is ignored.

The "pro-Israel" Lobby is just one part of the problem, albeit influential. It is not only problem.

Seems to me the fundamental problem is "us" and our incompetent and corrupt (morally and finanically) national leadership...Pogo theory obtains. Decadent leadership for a decadent republic in a free fall.

Ambassador Freeman's piece cited in another thread is dead on.

Meanwhile our enemies-competitors-rivals calculate and seek advantage as the "Game of Nations" inexorably moves on as it has over the centuries.

Jackie

Walrus,
Your fourth paragraph gives me hope. My question is, why they go one step too far?

jerseycityjoan

What an albatross Israel has become.

So now the curse is to go to the next generation.

I suppose the Israelis never worry that we'll finally give up on them. They probably should. Demographic changes taking place here are not to their advantage.

Redhand

What, in this, was seen as promising? i continue to believe that the Obama Administration was simply forced into this vain effort by its liberal Zionist campaign financiers.

It never was other than Kabuki Theater to me. Problem is the USA is constantly underwriting the costs of this foreign production. Only when we drastically reduce our financial support for Israel will this even begin to stop. They have absolutely no interest in "the peace process."

jonst

"Very foolish". But professionally profitable in the long run?

R Whitman

The Israelis may be running scared. This recent push to have Israel recognized as a Jewish state may lie in the assumption that the Palestinian Authority will abandon the two-state solution and revert to the one state solution and force a showdown on voting in Israeli Knesset elections.

Couple this with the information that Israel proper itself is 25% non-Jewish with suspect figures from the GOI(the actual in-country % may be much higher) and you have the makings of a real stalemate or legal takeover by non Jews in the future.

par4

This is one of the lesser problems the next generation will face. By mid century we may be looking at an extinction event brought on by peak oil,ocean fishing depletion and desertification.Throw in some nuclear exchanges between some nations and things don't look to rosy.

Sidney O. Smith III

I voted for Ms. Clinton in the Georgia primary, but, if I may, in her youth, wasn’t she part of the culture that use to sit around campfires and sing, “If I had a hammer”? And during breaks in the song, didn’t the crowd clamor on about the evil of their parents, all the injustices around the world and then look at each other and say, “Hey, I am ok and you are ok”, borrowing the words from the bestseller with such a title? And didn’t at least some of those in her crowd call Vietnam Vets “child killers”?

And now, lo and behold, all these years later, Ms. Clinton is suggesting that her actions and the efforts of the USG in the Middle East are helping children?

Wait a minute…what about the IDF dropping white phosphorus bombs on innocent women and children in Gaza? What about ethnic cleansing? What about leaving our children with backbreaking debt while invading other nation states that pose no security threat to the American people and whose people do not desire to be under the administrative control of the USG? What about all those who sang around the campfire in the late 1960’s and then sent our nation’s youth to war in 2003, ignoring the advice of those people who had fought in Vietnam? And who called General Zinni a traitor because he opposed Shock and Awe?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUKB3PxG-0E&feature=related

dan of steele

@SOS
I believe Ms Rodham was a college Republican and more than likely did not sit around the campfire singing Kumbaya or Puff the Magic Dragon.

just saying.

Roy G

Perhaps it is for the best that the figleaf of negotiations is torn off. Not extending a partial land-grab freeze, which was in effect in name only the last 10 years is a move trumpeting bad faith, and a 'nanner nanner' gesture towards the US.

I'd say that it's another sign of how far diplomacy has sunk. However, I also wonder at Ms. Clinton's teflon image. What has she done to distinguish herself from her predecessor? She talks the talk, but the only walk I see here is Ms. Clinton walking towards greener pastures, if you know what i'm saying. Weren't Secretaries of State once tougher than this?

Lee B

Why don't the Palestinians recognize Isreal as a Jewish state BEHIND 1967 BORDERS? If the Israelis really want that recognition, they'll have to agree. If they don't, they can't use that argument again.

Norbert N, Salamon

Lee:
The Palestinians can not disown the arab citizens of Israel, for then they would be complicit in establishing LEGAL apertheit [wherein the USA already is in the de facto apertheit]; thereofre, they will never agree to the notion that Israel is a Jewish State.

J

PressTV - US broke word on talks: Saudi prince

What is interesting is that while Turki lambasted D.C., he was silent in saying anything regarding British mischief making in the region under the Sykes-Picot agreement.


NCUSAR Arab-U.S. Policymakers Conference

Matthew

I like the way that the Obama Administration's weakness is now projected back onto the parties. Yes, the Palestinians are "unreasonable" because Netanyahu keeps stiffing President Obama.

Unfortunately, the Iranians will probably derive the wrong lesson from this Amateur Hour. President Obama will need to prove his "toughness" by provoking a conflict with a country without a powerful Congressional Lobby. Since Belize hasn't provoked us, I guess that means Iran.

Castellio

Let's be serious. This is just H. Clinton, speaking on behalf of the US, giving the Israelis more time to effect their ethnic cleansing.

I strongly suggest people watch the Chas Freeman speech at http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/296144-1

Robert R. Rock

The peace process is what Israel wanted. Israel needs the PA to continue to function as the thorn in Iran's side. The "Palestinian State" concept is a sugar coated autonomy plan. This is what Begin envisioned at Camp David. Arafat demanded it be called a state, so The Israelis were flexible and said okay, yes, a demilitarized state with a long list of conditions. This is Begin's autonomy.
Israel wants to have relations with it's neighbors. The problem remains the same: There is no country in the middle east which will sign away it's option of joining an eventual war to destroy Israel. The only deal Israel could cut, would amount to it's surrender as a prerequisite. Even a left wing government would never agree to that.
To Israel's arab foes, "peace" means the destruction of Israel. When Israel's foes declare, Israel does not want "peace", it means Israel refuses to fold, to surrender.
Clinton was merely stating accepted fact.
The ball is in the arab court to show good will. It will not be forthcoming, most certainly during the term of the most ant-Israel US president in history. The people who post here were counting on Obama. He let them down. Obama hurt the chances of neutering Israel any time soon.
Obama cooked his own goose and was hoisted up by his own bruno mally "ugly ass shoes".

Patrick Lang

RRR

"There is no country in the middle east which will sign away it's option of joining an eventual war to destroy Israel."

Actually, both Egypt and Jordan have done that...

Nevertheless, I find your opinion concerning Israel' real goal to be interesting. An autonomous region within Israel, that is what I think you are saying? The rest is window dressing?

Such a result, if accepted by the Palestinians would provide Israel with a permanent source of farm and construction labor while being able to police this "reservation" and insure its own internal security? That's a plan.

Unfortunately for the plan the Palestinians will not accept the concept. pl

jerseycityjoan

Well Mr. Rock, if peace for Israel is impossible, if its neighbors are permanent deadly enemies, then the only sensible thing to do is to disband Israel and let the Israelis go back to their parents' and grandparents' homelands. Those who can't do that should be given a nice cash stake that will enable them to go somewhere and set up a new life.

Let the State of Israel be considered an experiment that just didn't work because Israel's neighbors wouldn't permit it.

Sometimes the only rational solution for a problem that can't be fixed is to give up. So let's be reasonable and give up, OK?

J

jersycityjoan,

Ah yes, but one has to consider those who are NOT 'rationale', namely the 'Zionist' both Jewish AND Christian. Those 'Zionist' who continue to stir the cauldron of deceit and distrust between Arabs/Muslims and Jews/Christians. Those Zionists who are stirring, have an 'apocalyptic' vision of the 'end of days' wherein their self-styled Messiah comes to their rescue. It is interesting how the Zionists all discount what Heavan's version of events are supposed to be. That is what the anti-
Zionist Jews and Christians have been attempting to peel off the onion-skin of deception that the Zionists have worked so hard to put over the world's eyes. In the end, the Zionists will fail and Heaven's 'version' will win out much to the teeth-gnashing of the Zionists. It is those Zionists who are doing their level best to delay their having to stand before Heaven's final judgment for their lies/murders/thefts.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

August 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31          
Blog powered by Typepad