The Jewish Lobby

[Vladimir]

Pax vu biscum.

I'm waiting for someone to start quoting Life of Brian because I don't want to risk the warning points. Wait, those are names.

But yes, thank you.

[PanzerJaeger]

Says someone with a Panzer as a sig, german origin, and well documented Right Wing views...

rasoforos. I haven't seen that name around the forum in many years. It's good to see you posting again.

Why does the US support Israel? Its Realpolitik! Simple as that. For the same reason it was no problem selling F-15 planes to Saudi at the same time. For the same reason Osama bin Laden was made into a freedom fighter and then into a terrorist. Its what made the U.S a superpower in the first place. The ability to promote the country's interests without moral or cultural burdens. From my point of view there is absolutely no need for endless posts on a matter where things are simple.

If only it were that simple... Unfortunately, the situation is very much the opposite of that which would be expected under realpolitik - one that can only be described as the subservience of a global superpower to a tiny, geopolitically meaningless country. Israel is completely reliant on America, not the other way around. And yet, Israel's will is sacrosanct and her national security objectives, economic priorities, and even the fleeting whims of her political class become America's. Why is that? The powerful Jewish lobby has a stranglehold on America's political structure.

[Papewaio]

Why? Its what happens when you mix church with state (from the point of view that you have relatively religious politicians who wear it with pride)... end with very strange decisions based not on economics but religious geography to keep their voters happy.

Could be worse, you could be a buddhist country trying to support Tibet. 'China please leave Tibet or we will have to write you a stern note. And if you really upset us we will set ourselves on fire.'... kind of like the UN with more firepower.

[Lemur]

Here's an amazing interview with Tony Judt, shortly after the flotilla raid. Quoted for truth.

The characterization that comes to mind is "autistic." Israel behaved in a way that suggests it is no longer fully able to estimate, assess or understand the way other people think about it. Even if you supported the blockade (I don't) this would be an almost exemplary case of shooting oneself in a painful part of the anatomy.

Firstly because it alienates Turkey, who Israel needs in the longer run. Secondly because it was undertaken in international waters and largely at the expense of civilian victims. Thirdly because it was an overreaction. Fourthly because it had the predictable effect of weakening the case for a blockade rather than strengthening it.

In short, this is the action of a country which is fast losing touch with reality. [...]

Israel should be much, much more afraid of the Israel it's creating for itself: a semi-democratic, demagogic, far-right warrior state dominated by racist Russians and crazed rabbis. In this perspective, an internationally policed and guaranteed federal state of Israel, with the same rights and resources for Jews and Arabs, looks a lot less frightening to me. [...]

Israel is behaving very much like the annoying little Judean state that the Romans finally dismantled in frustration. This classical analogy may be more relevant than we think. I suspect that in decades to come America (the new Rome) will abandon Israel as annoying, expensive, and a liability.

Honestly, Israel's behavior in the past couple of years is beyond understanding. Describing it as "autistic" is fair and accurate. Alienating Turkey? Madness. Alienating Egypt? Madness. Dissing the current President and depending on a single party in the USA (which may or may not hold power in any given year)? Madness. It's as though Israel wants to be isolated, friendless and vulnerable.

[Hax]

Autism would be incorrect, I believe not all of the Knesset or indeed, the Likud party has gone to hell. Misplaced arrogance would likely come closer, they probably think they're invincible. And with American support, they pretyt much are. For now, at least.

[Tellos Athenaios]

I don't think he cares too much for Belgium though:

Well, there could be a federal state of two autonomous communities -- on the Swiss or Belgian model (don't tell me the latter doesn't work -- it works very well but is opposed by Flemings led by people very much like [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu and [Foreign Minister Avigdor] Lieberman)

... That's rather a weird comparison to make.

[Hooahguy]

Im going to necro this thread only in light of the whole Iran thing. Also, the whole Jonathan Pollard issue which many Jews are now taking up, now that Shalit is free and they need another "free this guy now" campaign.

First off, Iran. I think its hilarious that Israel, which seems so intent on a strike on Iran, is expecting the US to help. Yet they fail to remember that we just got out of one war and is still bogged down in another. And most likely the US would be carrying most of the weight in a war because Israel doesnt have the manpower to have a war with a country like Iran. So you would have to be naive to not realize why the US is so cautious about a war.

And now for Pollard. What. The. .
He is a spy. He deserves his sentence 100%. People are always saying "oh, Israel is an ally, he shouldnt have had such a long sentence" and other bull.
Here's an idea for you: a stranger comes up and hits you in the face. Later, a friend comes up and hits you in the face. Who will you be more angry at and punish more?
I dont know about you guys, but Id be angrier at my friend, and as such, Pollard should rot in jail like the traitor he is.


And yeah, AIPAC is way too powerful. Needs to be curtailed. Sometimes I wonder who "wears the pants" in this relationship.

And Israel is turning into a "a semi-democratic, demagogic, far-right warrior state dominated by racist Russians and crazed rabbis" country, as the quote in Lemur's post said.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Man, I just did a bit of reading on that Pollard. Hooahguy has the right of it; he's a traitor scum who should die in prison.

I also don't see what Israel offers us as an ally, except a huge reason for Islamists to hate us more. And they always want us to fight wars for them.

CR

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I also don't see what Israel offers us as an ally, except a huge reason for Islamists to hate us more. And they always want us to fight wars for them.

CR

That's pretty mercenary.

[Lemur]

That's pretty mercenary.

In general, nations should pursue their best interests, correct? To suggest otherwise is an appeal to some sort of altruism or idealism.

In the cold war we judged support of Israel a sensible and sound investment. Now? I'd be curious to hear the rationale.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

In general, nations should pursue their best interests, correct?

Why would it not be in the national interest to help people out who don't do much for us? We like doing that, therefore it's in our interest to do it. You wouldn't propose that as way to live personally would you? "This friend of mine hasn't done much for me lately...not sure he's a sound investment anymore..." would make you sound like a sociopath. And moving from the personal to the national scale isn't an excuse to become amoral.

If there's a good reason to back away from Israel it isn't that.

[rvg]

"This friend of mine hasn't done much for me lately...not sure he's a sound investment anymore..." would make you sound like a sociopath. And moving from the personal to the national scale isn't an excuse to become amoral...

Sure it is. Morality has no place in international politics.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

So I learned two things today.

1) "appeal to altruism" is apparently some kind of logical fallacy
2) rvg doesn't think genocide is wrong when you do it against another country, rather than internally

[rvg]

So I learned two things today.

1) "appeal to altruism" is apparently some kind of logical fallacy
2) rvg doesn't think genocide is wrong when you do it against another country, rather than internally

Lesson learned.

[Lemur]

"This friend of mine hasn't done much for me lately...not sure he's a sound investment anymore..." would make you sound like a sociopath. And moving from the personal to the national scale isn't an excuse to become amoral.

That's a strange way of looking at things. Friends give each other all sorts of things, the pleasure of one another's company being first and foremost. Not to mention shared activities, shared interests, movie time, etc. I don't see how that translates into geopolitics.

If you're keen that we stand by our friends (defined by nations who hold similar interests and have been there for us time and time again) then I'm all in favor. But Israel, like any rational nation, is looking out for number one. They have no problem with spying on us or killing our sailors and marines should they deem it appropriate. They don't care even slightly about our aims in the Middle East. Indeed, the entire Arab Spring can be seen as a bit of an inconvenience to Israel, given that it undercuts their claim to be the sole democracy in the neighborhood.

Our friend is out for himself. He's the kid of guy who forgets to buy his round at the bar, beats his live-in girlfriend and involves us in his drama. If we call him for help moving that couch? I don't think he's gonna show up. You say "friend," I say bipolar deadbeat who wants us to pay his bills and fight his fights. Where do you go when the friendship is almost entirely a one-way street?

We have some real friends. If you want to make the case that Israel is one, by all means do so.

[PanzerJaeger]

Why would it not be in the national interest to help people out who don't do much for us? We like doing that, therefore it's in our interest to do it. You wouldn't propose that as way to live personally would you? "This friend of mine hasn't done much for me lately...not sure he's a sound investment anymore..." would make you sound like a sociopath. And moving from the personal to the national scale isn't an excuse to become amoral.

If there's a good reason to back away from Israel it isn't that.

The issue is that in the realm of international politics, supporting the geopolitical interests of one nation is almost always to the detriment of another - so it is best for nations to support others when interests align. That is the core of Realpolitik. In this instance, unwavering support of Israel has pitted the US against the interests of others in the region and garnered significant ill will. It is worthwhile to question the benefit of the relationship to the US.

Altruism is really a completely different animal, as it does not entail weighing the interests of multiple factions. The choices are much simpler when altruism comes into play. If there were some sort of natural disaster or humanitarian crisis in Israel, I, and I suspect most that take issue with the Israeli stranglehold on US Middle Eastern policy, would have no hesitation about sending as much aid as possible to the scene, as the US always does in such situations. Similarly, if Israel were attacked by her neighbors without cause other than hatred and historical animus as was done in the past, support would surely be forthcoming. However, such situations are not what are being discussed. There is a significant difference between altruism and reflexively vetoing every UN resolution pertaining to Israel, proffering political cover for provocative actions in the region, and sending billions of dollars to the developed nation.

That's where a lot of the support for Israel in the US comes from - misplaced altruism. Most Americans still view Israel through the lense of the David versus Goliath narrative that resulted from the Israeli-Arab wars and the religious overtones it invokes in Christian circles. The geopolitical makeup of the region is much different these days, though. Israel has not faced a threat to its existence in a very long time.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I came to the realization that my unwavering support of Israel was based primarily on my extreme dislike for the Palestinians and their activities- dancing in the streets after 9/11, suicide bombing their children, suicide bombing other people's children, etc. There's no doubt, they're a pretty terrible group of people on the whole and have been consumed by the Islamist culture that I despise.

Welcome. I hope that we are able to break the Zionist power hold soon. I think that it is wavering. The excesses of the modern Israeli government are showing themselves everywhere. Israel weakens us. We should seek to ensure that they survive as "A" state (notice I didn't say anything about a "jewish" state, which is an abusive and horrifying concept in the 21st century), but purely to protect people from the backlash that they have caused over the past century. Israel has been one of the single worst creations in past memory and, while the Jewish enthno/religious group needs to be protected from destruction, their "state" does not.

Sasaki, Israel is no friend of ours. Israel likes it's disproportionate advantage in the world and sucks up to the bare minimal extent. They are currently occupied by a racist and apartheid government and no government of that sort should be a long term ally of ours.

P.S. - I fail to see a purpose for our support of Israel, except that they are a tremendous buyer of our weapons... with the money that we give them. Where is it that we would be without our support of that place? If Israel were just another State or was never created in the first place, how would we be harmed by this?

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Well, that's like I was saying. The reasons people normally give for not wanting to back israel involve a whole lot more than the stuff that was being said.

[Hooahguy]

Recently, an IDF soldier hit a Danish protester in the face with his rifle.

Way to go Israel, keep alienating people.

Idiots.

[Strike For The South]

Welcome. I hope that we are able to break the Zionist power hold soon.

I can't take this seriously

[Hax]

Interestingly, the David and Goliath narrative is built upon the fallacy that Israel was supposedly outnumbered during the 1948 war. The Arabs weren't only outnumbered by over 10,000 men but also suffered from internal divisions and weren't able to capitalise on the June ceasefire as much as the Israelis. It wasn't really all that surprising that the Israelis won the war.

I also think that the idea of Palestinians as a whole approving of massacring children is kind of stereotypical. I've witnessed the greatest naivety and misguidedness amongst pro-Palestinian supporters, but advocating or approving of suicide bombing goes a bit too far.

[rvg]

Interestingly, the David and Goliath narrative is built upon the fallacy that Israel was supposedly outnumbered during the 1948 war. The Arabs weren't only outnumbered by over 10,000 men but also suffered from internal divisions and weren't able to capitalise on the June ceasefire as much as the Israelis. It wasn't really all that surprising that the Israelis won the war.

They knew that too, did they not? Yet they still refused to negotiate and approve the 1947 partition.

I also think that the idea of Palestinians as a whole approving of massacring children is kind of stereotypical. I've witnessed the greatest naivety and misguidedness amongst pro-Palestinian supporters, but advocating or approving of suicide bombing goes a bit too far.

Both sides killed innocents.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I can't take this seriously

I see what you mean. Do you dispute that there is such a thing or that their lobby has a tremendous amount of power?

[Hooahguy]

I see what you mean. Do you dispute that there is such a thing or that their lobby has a tremendous amount of power?

That has nothing to do with it. The whole "WE MUST BREAK THE STRANGELHOLD OF TEH ZIONISTS!!!!!" sounds like some crazed person.

[rvg]

That has nothing to do with it. The whole "WE MUST BREAK THE STRANGELHOLD OF TEH ZIONISTS!!!!!" sounds like some crazed person.

Not to mention that the bulk of "teh zionist" support comes from the evangelicals.

[Hax]

Both sides killed innocents.

Excuse me, why are you telling me this? Don't think I don't know.

They knew that too, did they not? Yet they still refused to negotiate and approve the 1947 partition

I'm keeping this quote here so I can respond to it later. For the Arab side, I think it was largely a matter of principle: any surrender of Arab land was unacceptable. It's not that strange a position to take, really.

[rvg]

Excuse me, why are you telling me this? Don't think I don't know.

To make it clear that this wasn't a "good guys vs bad guys" kind of conflict.

[Vladimir]

I'm keeping this quote here so I can respond to it later. For the Arab side, I think it was largely a matter of principle: any surrender of Arab land was unacceptable. It's not that strange a position to take, really.

Agreed. It is completely justified Islamic, if not Arabic, et al, moral code to recover "lost" land. It's not too different from anyone else's views, really.

On Israel's value to the U.S.: Israel is our closest ideological partner and most stable country in that corner of the planet. We give them significant amounts of money and technology and put up with a lot of their b.s., but they give us access to a great deal of stuff that no other country in the region can. You don't ditch partners just because they come with baggage.

[rvg]

Agreed. It is completely justified Islamic, if not Arabic, et al, moral code to recover "lost" land. It's not too different from anyone else's views, really.

It was still a mistake imho. Their utter refusal to compromise had backfired in a very bad way. The "my way or the highway" kind of attitude usually results in the "highway".

[Vladimir]

It was still a mistake imho. Their utter refusal to compromise had backfired in a very bad way. The "my way or the highway" kind of attitude usually results in the "highway".

Highways? Kinda like Roman roads?