Bibi’s Hollow Victory
"The Jewish people were building Jerusalem 3,000 years ago, and the Jewish people are building Jerusalem today. Jerusalem is not a settlement. It is our capital."
With this defiant declaration, to a thunderous ovation at AIPAC, Benjamin Netanyahu informed the United States that East Jerusalem, taken from Jordan in the Six Day War, is not occupied land. It is Israeli land and Israel's forever, and no Palestinian state will share Jerusalem. Israel alone decides what is built, and where, in the Holy City.
With his declaration and refusal to walk back the decision to build 1,600 new housing units in East Jerusalem, which blew up the Biden mission, "Bibi" goes home a winner over Barack Obama.
But it is a temporary triumph and hollow victory—over Israel's indispensable ally. For the clash revealed that the perceived vital interests of Israel now collide with vital U.S. interest in the Middle East.
We have clarity. There is now visible daylight between U.S. and Israeli policy for all the world to see. And America cannot back down without eviscerating her credibility in the Arab and Muslim world
What are the major points of contention?
To Netanyahu, withdrawal from Gaza was a strategic blunder that led to a Hamas takeover and rockets on Israel. That blunder will not be repeated with the West Bank. Israel had a hellish time forcing 8,000 Jews to leave Gaza and will not force 250,000 Jews to leave ancestral lands on the West Bank to create a Palestinian state where the possibility will always exist that Hamas will win at the ballot box and become the government. As for Jerusalem, its city limits are now Israel's permanent borders. Annexation is irreversible.
The American position?
The West Bank, including East Jerusalem, is occupied territory. Building there violates international law. Peace requires a sharing of Jerusalem, return of almost all of the West Bank and withdrawal of the Jewish settlers. And any land annexed by Israel must be compensated for with Israeli land ceded to the Palestinians.
That the U.S. position is not anti-Israel is attested to by the fact that Prime Ministers Ehud Barack and Ehud Olmert came close to a peace with the Palestinians based on these principles.
Netanyahu, however, does not accept them. For he won office denouncing them, and in his ruling coalition are parties that not only opposed withdrawal from Gaza, they oppose a Palestinian state.
Given the irreconcilable positions, the deadlock, why will Israel not prevail as she always prevails in such collisions? Why would Bibi's "No" to Obama's demand for a halt to the building of settlements and a cancellation of the 1,600 housing units in Jerusalem not be the final and irrevocable answer that Obama must grudgingly accept?
Answer: There is a new party to the quarrel: the U.S. military, in the person of Gen. David Petraeus.
According to Foreign Policy magazine, in January, a delegation of senior officers from Petraeus' command were sent to brief Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Michael Mullen.
"The briefers reported that there was a growing perception among Arab leaders that the U.S. was incapable of standing up to Israel, that CentCom's mostly Arab constituency was losing faith in American promises, that Israel's intransigence on the Arab-Palestinian conflict was jeopardizing U.S. standing in the region, and that (George) Mitchell himself was . . . 'too old, too slow and too late.'"
Mullen took this stark message—that America was seen as too weak to stand up to Israel, and the U.S. military posture was eroding in the Arab world as a result—straight to the White House. Hence, when Joe Biden was sandbagged in Israel, he apparently tore into Bibi in private.
"This is starting to get dangerous for us," Biden reportedly told Netanyahu. "What you're doing here undermines the security of our troops who are fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan."
Yedioth Ahronoth further reported: "The vice president told his Israeli hosts that since many people in the Muslim world perceived a connection between Israel's actions and U.S. policy, any decision about construction that undermines Palestinian rights in East Jerusalem could have an impact on the personal safety of American troops."
Biden was saying Israeli intransigence could cost American lives.
Each new report of settlement expansion, each new seizure of Palestinian property, each new West Bank clash between Palestinians and Israeli troops inflames the Arab street, humiliates our Arab allies, exposes America as a weakling that cannot stand up to Israel, and imperils our troops and their mission in Afghanistan and Iraq.
As this message has now been delivered by Gen. Petraeus to his commander in chief, Obama simply cannot back down again. If he does not stand up now for U.S. interests, which are being imperiled by Israeli actions, he will lose the backing of his soldiers.
U.S.-Israeli relations are approaching a "Whose side are you on?" moment. Either Bibi backs down this time—or Obama loses his soldiers.
COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS.COM
Entries(RSS)
I don't think there will ever be peace in the Middle East. It has been a disaster for the USA to ever back the founding of Israel starting with it's recognition in 1948. It has been a disaster for the ancient Christian communities of the Arab world and hasn't done the Jews much good either. In the end what is the final dream of Israel but a walled ghetto surrounded by atomic bombs. Then they can rebuild the Temple and go back to sacrifing cattle, sheep. and pidgeons.
The Bible states quite clearly the atrocities that the original conquest of the Holy Land required. The ethical or political inability to do the same 3,000 years later makes Zionism a futility.
A few days ago, Veterans Today ran an article about Dr. Alan Sabrosky, a Jew, ex-Marine, and former director of studies at the US Army War College. According to the article, Dr. Sabrosky claims Israel was behind 9/11. There is also the forgotten outrage of the USS Liberty, where 31 sailors were murdered and 171 wounded when Israel torpedoed, strafed, napalmed, and bombed the Liberty, which was clearly in international waters. Israel is no ally.
The idea that our troops are all of a sudden exposed to a new and heightened threat because of Netanyahu's actions seems implausible, and the publicity surrounding the President's briefing is suspicious. It may be that based on intelligence an Israeli attack on Iran was immanent and Petraeus resorted to indirection to ensure that Obama and his half-witted aides didn't give Israel the green light. It's one thing for Obama, Biden, Reid, Pelosi, and their ilk to force their domestic agenda on us, but altogether something else of cataclysmic proportions to allow them and Israel's Fifth Column to direct our military operations in the Middle East, leading us down a slippery slope to all-out global warfare.
Dan,
There is probably little doubt that the Mossad and the CIA were tracking at least some of the bad guys who killed Americans on 9-11. Just as there is little question that the FBI and ATF had undercover folks working at Elohim City where Timothy McVeigh was a known quantity. BUT, most intelligence operations are not of such a nature that nothing hardly ever goes wrong. Recently the Jordanian triple agent who blew up himself and his CIA handlers, did so after they were preparing to help him celebrate his birthday with a cake and all the customary accents of a party. He decided to wear a bomb belt instead to add surprise to the festivity, just as perhaps Timothy McVeigh gave his trackers a slip by showing up much later for the crime than was expected. Things do go wrong at times but because they do, does not mean they were planned to go wrong, or that the events which happened were "planned to happen" . No good investigator goes beyond what the evidence can tell him but this never seems to stop the tin foil hat crowd. I do thank you for the article.
Robert,
I referred interested readers to an article appearing in the reputable Veterans Today, which they can judge for themselves, so I don't understand the patronizing lecture based on totally irrelevant issues. If Mossad knew about the specifics of the attack in advance and did not warn the US, it would be "behind" the attack, just as you would be guilty if you found money mistakenly deposited in your bank account, kept the information to yourself, and benefited from that mistake.
Dan,
I am sorry, as I did not intend to be patronizing but this does illustrate the confusion of these type of theories. The works I have read about 9-11 indicate that Mossad had notified American intelligence agencies but because they also had a tendency to always exagerate such warnings it was somewhat discounted by the Americans. I do not know, and that was my point. It is very difficult if not impossible for the average citizen to follow this type of thing with any correct understanding so suspicion always reigns supreme. As I said in my last post, thank you for the article.
Mr. Buchanan is right on target. We have a moment of clarity. But when did clarity ever have anything to do with American politics?
The whole art and practice of American politics is evasion of clarity.
From The American Conservative site, by Leon Hadar:
“Bibi’s winning coalition included members of the nationalist and ultra-orthodox fringe of Israeli politics. However, the coalition was not complete – Netanyahu and his neocon friends had counted on the election of their political ally, Sen. John McCain, as well as the possible selection of Sen. Joseph Lieberman as vice president (or secretary of state).”
He might of added, with Ultra-Israeli Nationalist, Sarah Palin, as Vice-President. Why is it the Tea Partiers have no gripe with subsidizing socialism when it comes to subsidizing Israel’s socialist state ( i.e., a state based on militarism, the father of socialism; Prussia founded state-control of the economy in order to maximize its militaristic state), with its socialistic medical system? And why do Republicans always get a free ride by PJB when it comes to their even more extreme support and enthusiasm for Israeli policies. The fact is, Israel wouldn’t be able to get by with half of what they do if it wasn’t for folks that PJB loves. Pat's getting by with having his cake and eating it too until he calls out Sarah Palin.
Here is a posting for Dr. Fleming and any other Roman scholar or student from the Lew Rockwell Blog site. Since the Mr. Buchanan article is about Israel, and our Lord Jesus Christ suffered and died there 2000 years ago, I thought it appropriate to post it here. Any thoughts or reactions?
Good Friday, AKA a Day of Roman “Justice”
Posted by Ryan W. McMaken on April 2, 2010 04:09 PM
The civilization of the Roman Empire was bloodthirsty, militaristic, scientifically backward, and philosophically stunted. They had an inferiority complex about not being Greek for good reason. Politically, the Romans took war and terror everywhere they went. I’m amazed when people speak of the Roman for spreading “civilization.” The Pax Romana was the worst kind of international oppression and intimidation. An avaricious kleptocracy that built cities upon the backs of slaves, the Romans deified their rulers and slaughtered those who would not bow to the decadent parasites of the imperial palaces. Warmongers and statists of every age speak well of the Romans, from Hamilton to Napoleon to the Straussian neoconservatives of today.
Pontius Pilate, a first-century bureaucrat, soldier, and politician, condemned Jesus of Nazareth to death for reasons of political expediency, and then proceeded to use the Roman torture-execution method of crucifixion. If only that had been the only time Rome had tortured and murdered an innocent person. Killing Jews was pretty much a hobby for the Romans, as was defiling Jewish holy places.
Later, the Christians were treated to the same sort of Pax Romana that the Jews had endured. Here’s a dramatization of Roman justice in AD 69:
When I was an atheist, I used to hear my co-religionists extol the many virtues of the Romans since we perceived them as the victims of those nasty Christians. “If only Roman civilization had not fallen” we used to say, “then there would never have been a dark age, and we’d all be living in a technological utopia today.” (This was a favorite claim of Madalyn Murray O’Hair) Yeah, right. Beyond roads and aqueducts, the Romans had no aptitude for science at all, and advancements in agricultural production and manufacturing were non-existent for centuries under the Romans. The far more scientifically-adept Europeans of the Middle Ages would have seemed magical to the witch doctors who passed for scientists in ancient Rome.
The primary legacy of the Romans is death. What few contributions they did make—such as that of legal codes—were accidental, and even then just part of the machinery they employed to murder Gauls and Celts and Germans and Jews and Christians
Sounds like a lot of hogwash to me. Why the axe grinding over a civilisation long dead? I may as well start off on a rant about the bloody ritual crimes of the Aztecs, but how will that increase our understanding of a fascinating civilisation? Why not make an effort at understanding the history and culture of an ancient people rather than condemning them with falsehoods and ridiculous unfounded assertions? We should approach history and ancient peoples with open minds and honesty, and of course the bad parts should be known and understood, sed de mortuis nil nisi bonum.
That should be 'sed de mortuis nihil nisi bonum.'
Israel... hasn’t done the Jews much good
I talked on the phone the other day with the sister of my Jewish Florida lawyer, now herself a lawyer, who heard about another Jewish friend of mine who was considering repatriating himself from Israel back to Florida. "Good!" she said. "One less person in Israel!" And she meant it.
Last year I had lunch at a pub and discussed a bit with the barman, who had an American accent. Turns out he had grown up not in the U.S. but in Israel. I mentioned I had a friend who had moved there recently. He made a bizarre face and asked, "WHY??"
Apart from perhaps Saudi Arabia or Egypt, I cannot think of any place *less* safe for a Jew than the Holy Land--and so long as there is television and newspaper it never will be safe for them.
I need to make it a point to see Ajami this week.