Posted by Mackubin T. Owens
I have an op-ed intoday’s Wall Street Journal about President Obama and Israel. This may be the most anti-Israel adminstration in US history.
Many pundits, politicians, and other pompous persons railed against the Bush administration for alienating our "friends and allies", though France and many other EU countries ought not to even be considered either one of those, for a "lone ranger" foreign policy. President Obama has certainly done a lot to CHANGE this approach. Now Mr. Obama, seeks to "buddy up" with the governments that would cut our throat-
"The Czechs and Poles are rightly concerned that they will be sacrificed on the altar of better U.S. relations with Russia. And the Israelis fear that the Obama administration’s desired opening to the Muslim world will be achieved at their expense"
Whether you agree or disagree with the Bush administration there is no doubt that they understood the difference between good and bad, liberty and tyranny.
Obama has not, and will not, cut, billions in military aid to Israel, from 1.8 to 3 billion per year. You can return to your over-heated rhetoric that his is the most anti-Israeli administration in history when that gets cut. Hundreds of millions in aid to any country allows the american president, at the least, to make occasional demands. I don't know what to make of your casting Obama's perspective as a holocaust guilt narrative. I'm pretty sure that would be safer than the dispensationalist-rapture narrative, that there is a biblical imperative to defend Israel.
Why do people become pragmatic when talking about deals with China or the kingdom of saud, but then switch to idealistic when discussing Israel? Pragmaticly what has zionism brought to the table to be a sacred cow of US foriegn policy?
Pragmaticly what has zionism brought to the table to be a sacred cow of US foriegn policy?
The promise of a "Second Coming" and the pleasure of God?
Pragmatically what does Israel offer the U.S.? Umm... how about every military strategic advantage we could have over Iraqi insurgents and Al-Qaeda. Leave your idealism at the door, as you have implored pro-Israel contingents to do, and the U.S. is undeniably fighting in a style of warfare that Israel has had to deal with for over a half-century. Who did we turn to after 9/11? The Israeli military. Who do we still continue to rely on in order to make any progress in Iraq or Afghanistan? The Israeli military. Need proof? check out this article
Et Tu, Brute?
What would Arabs do to Israel and Israelis without U.S. protection? Go read their what they say among themselves if you have any doubt. What you guys are saying is that Israel has no right to exist as a nation. Jews have no right to live where they wish. Liberty is not practical. No. It isn't.
That is a good article, Mac. Maybe the U.S. will give money to the Czechs and the Poles (not to mention the Georgians and Ukrainians) as we watch Russia squeeze them.
This new pragmatism of Obama's and in what I read in those comments above makes me queasy.
Yea, but who knew Joe Biden was a Mark Steyn fan?
Who did we turn to after 9/11? The Israeli military. Who do we still continue to rely on in order to make any progress in Iraq or Afghanistan? The Israeli military.
You're deranged. And your link contradicts your assertions.
Obama: Be nice to our enemies, but hector our friends
Abroad, perhaps. It will be snowing in Hell before Obama is nice to any domestic enemies, or "hectors" any domestic friends.
Brutus, I am not advocating giving money to other countries. I am saying that is what the USA does, often not even to "keep them on our side". For my lifetime, at least, America has been throwing money at countries like the doctors of my youth suggested aspirin for every pain. Sometimes aspirin, or money, exacerbates bleeding and can kill the patient. So, too, US money is not panacea and can make all sorts of problems for our supposed beneficiaries.
Did you ever read, The Mouse That Roared by Leonard Wibberly? It is not at all scholarly, but most effectively mocked America's inclination to throw money at their enemies, hoping to turn them into allies. You can read it online. It is even fun.
I am saying that even if we give money to nations being pressed into submission by Russia it will not do them much good. They need more than foreign or humanitarian aid from us. Whether the US can afford to give it or not might be the real question. However, you, like most of America, do not know anything about Russia if you think it harmless. Go read what Putin has said about Russia's place in the world, for a start.
I know a few things about Russia that make me sympathetic. 1. they are the only EU nation without a rothschild owned central bank. 2. After their experience with the new world order communists they have rebelled against the idea of population control and hold breading parties. (something hitler did and I certainly don't advocate, but at least it is not a one child policy enforced by forced abortions.) 3. Russia probably saved our country during the civil war by sending her navy to help the union blockade and make the british think twice about entering the war to divide up the nation. We probably have a ton in common with them(the people) considering the paranoia of the cold war was a shared experience. We could learn a lot from them, about what to avoid because their trip( or all trips toward isms) end in purges and secret police.
If you can give me a link about Putin making menacing comments I would appreciate it. I am curious to try to see if it is rhetorical posturing or something really worrying. I will not doubt that in the near future Russia could become more of a power than us with all their oil revenue and our wrecked economy.
I would never deny that a nation has a right to exist. I think that is, as has always been, determined by their skill at diplomacy and military force. How did any nation come to exist?
We need a base in the middle east to fight people who hate us in part due to the existence of the nation serving as the base in the middle east. I think Iraq is our base in the middle east now. I will believe Obama is taking anti-zionist positions for any reason other than his ego inflating empty rhetoric when it happens. His chief of staff served in Israel's armed forces. His handlers have never been about abondoning Israel. If that were to happen what pretext would there be to destabalize the region and keep the machine humming.
As if we don't give money to Russia's former satellites to keep them on our side. However, it is interesting that you would advocate this, but many conservatives point out that when our government doles out entitlements they make people dependent or create an atmosphere of owing them(the government) something. I really don't understand the continued fear of Russia, their current state is probably not any more tyranical and oppressive than the rest of the EU. I have never heard of Russian aggression or ambition(following the cold war rhetoric) like with the common themes given when describing the World Wars and the Germans. What does either side stand to gain, is there anything left for the bankers to loot?
Brutus, google "Putin threatens" and have fun.
For even more fun, try googling Rothschild and "central bank," and look at all the neo-Nazi sites that come up.
Mine was a lazy response. However, the websites in my search are the New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, The Guardian, Forbes, ABC news, and other sources like that. How about yours, John Moser?
What do you mean by that Dr. Moser, is that an assertion that saying the Rothschild family controlling the central banks of Europe is a anti-sematic myth? You will get no contest from me that there are a lot of stupid people out there who think race or religion matters more than money and power to the global elite. Since you brought it up though, how did the Germans get the money to pay for WWII after the inflation of the Weimar Republic?
I'm seeing threatens to review relations with EU, cut off EU energy supply, aim missles at EU(how long does it really take to change what a missle is aimed at, this sounds rhetorical), threatens to get out of missle treaty due to missle shield. I was really expecting "we will crush you" part II or something. Am I missing anything in that? I am not saying trust the Rusky, but I just don't see where they have much to gain or we have much to gain from a new arms race/ cold war, niether nation has the money to even do it at this point.
Your explination sounds logical, but is that you get money? Why is our economy down, did we loose our know-how and capacity, oh right, you need credit to expand or build anything? Someone has to float the loans to get those things moving. I really hate this topic and I'm moving on. I'm done arguing anything about Russia or Israel on here because I just don't really see the point. Ruskies are evil, Israel is the second greatest nation on earth.
Russia is not a EU nation as some idiot said in a post. Putin is a former KGB thug and all this is documented. He is worth over 30 billion dollars which he denies but, people have been killed trying to prove that.
Russia's economy is tamking. They do not have the required technology to extract oil from some areas in Siberia and, as to the Arctic, dream on. The US is the only nation with the technology.
Ashbrook Center at Ashland University | 401 College Avenue | Ashland, Ohio 44805 | (419) 289-5411 | (877) 289-5411 (Toll Free)