Israel

[statsman 5698]

On 3/12/2024 at 3:27 PM, Make em eat Taco Bell said:

Israel isn't paying the Arabs a dime.  Survey says 68% of Israelis don't even want humanitarian aid trucks to go into Gaza. Their attitude is kill/starve the Arabs, each is a terrorist in their bloodthirsty psychotic revenge motive. Gazans need to gtfo asap, before the IDF murders another 30,000.

The way I heard it reported- most Israelis say no humanitarian aid to Gaza until the hostages are returned, which is a slightly different take. 
 
The WSJ reporter said the average Israeli is more hardline right now than Netanyahu’s policies. He says they talk about “October 6 mindset” and “October 8 mindset” a lot. 

[Satchel 6983]

The Israel-Hamas story is one with a lot of moving parts:

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/10/world/middleeast/israel-qatar-money-prop-up-hamas.html

[bolverk 30366]

38 minutes ago, statsman said:

 

Here’s a question, moved from DT thread-

Hamas’ military is funded by Iran. Shortly after 10-7, the WSJ reported that Iran helped plan 10-7. What was Iran’s plan? Was it tied into the other ME activities? Was it a favor to their Russian allies, to take attention and pressure from them?

 Also- was Hamas expecting Hezbollah to join in, from the north? I know Israel has been wary of Hezbollah this whole time, keeping forces in place near them.  
 
In conclusion, what exactly was the plan?

By all accounts, Iran was surprised by the raid/massacre/attack. Yes, they'd been supplying weapons, training, and planning, but from what I've read, they didn't expect it to happen when it did. Hezbollah was also surprised, and both Iran and Hezbollah told Hamas they're pretty much on their own in this conflict after Hamas requested assistance. However, that doesn't mean there wasn't some other plan for the future that would've been more coordinated among the Axis. 

Some of the benefits that Iran may see, depending on how things shake out:

• Weakened Western support for the nation of Israel (this has already happened to Bibi's government);
• Stalled, delayed, or canceled normalization of ties between Israel/Saudi Arabia, which could eventually lead to an Israeli/Sunni alliance against Iran;
• More chaos (the "ladder") in the Middle East, which Iran has successfully climbed since W stupidly decided to invade Iraq. 

There might be more, but that's from just the top of my head.

[Make em eat Taco Bell 1549]

22 hours ago, statsman said:

The way I heard it reported- most Israelis say no humanitarian aid to Gaza until the hostages are returned, which is a slightly different take. 
 
The WSJ reporter said the average Israeli is more hardline right now than Netanyahu’s policies. He says they talk about “October 6 mindset” and “October 8 mindset” a lot. 

humanitarian aid should never be a bargaining chip. Why starve kids, women & elderly for any reason? 

Israel is MAGA^ MAGA, even more than you.

[statsman 5698]

32 minutes ago, Make em eat Taco Bell said:

humanitarian aid should never be a bargaining chip. Why starve kids, women & elderly for any reason? 

I don’t disagree with you. And Israel is not using it that way. 
 
Hamas, however, they are absolutely using captive kids, women and elderly as bargaining chips. 

[Jatrain 288]

3 hours ago, statsman said:

I don’t disagree with you. And Israel is not using it that way. 
 

They’re not?  President Biden in his SOTU seemed to imply they are.

 

Edited March 19 by Jatrain

[Jatrain 288]

Israel Announces Largest West Bank Land Seizure Since 1993

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/03/22/israel-largest-west-bank-settlement-blinken-visit/

 

I’m sure they need it for security.

 

[chainsaw 10308]

45 minutes ago, Jatrain said:

Israel Announces Largest West Bank Land Seizure Since 1993

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/03/22/israel-largest-west-bank-settlement-blinken-visit/

 

I’m sure they need it for security.

 

This will surely improve Israel's plummeting levels of support

[WhatTheBuck 28940]

Call it what it is. It’s theft. They’re not “settlers,” they’re thieves. 

[Anastasis 23717]

These people are lunatics.

 

 

[David Dennison 19569]

1 hour ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Call it what it is. It’s theft. They’re not “settlers,” they’re thieves. 

Aren't all settlers of populated lands?

[Anastasis 23717]

This guy likes the F16.

 

 

[Anastasis 23717]

Damn, Churchill was an asshole huh?

 

[Anastasis 23717]

It's a thread, but is that a real Churchill quote?

 

 

[RomaVicta 30624]

I'd not heard or read that quote, but it fits his actions.

He was the 20th Century promoter of colonization conquest in Ireland and Palestine. He employed an army of brutal thugs in both places to act against the indigenous people. 

The more you know about him (I still don't know a lot) the more he seems kind of like a Reagan for the Brits except he was smart and served his country in the field. His main service to the UK seems to have been his use as a poster boy for British resistance and perseverance which did help his country. His problem seems to have been that he didn't give a shit about helping or tolerating anyone else.

[TreatyOak 17410]

47 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

I'd not heard or read that quote, but it fits his actions.

He was the 20th Century promoter of colonization conquest in Ireland and Palestine. He employed an army of brutal thugs in both places to act against the indigenous people. 

The more you know about him (I still don't know a lot) the more he seems kind of like a Reagan for the Brits except he was smart and served his country in the field. His main service to the UK seems to have been his use as a poster boy for British resistance and perseverance which did help his country. His problem seems to have been that he didn't give a shit about helping or tolerating anyone else.

While he certainly had his flaws, his views on racial superiority were very common for his time. And while he was no great military strategist, he rightly perceived the biggest threats to Western civilization in Hitler and Stalin. Without his resolve, we could be living in a much worse world today. 

[GW Hayduke 1957]

Did you guys hear George Washington owned slaves!!?!

[David Dennison 19569]

3 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

Did you guys hear George Washington owned slaves!!?!

It was very common for his time.

[GW Hayduke 1957]

15 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

It was very common for his time.

Sure but did you know John Adams made his wife spend a lot of her time in the kitchen!!?!

[Earl Haffler 637]

8 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

Sure but did you know John Adams made his wife spend a lot of her time in the kitchen!!?!

Well, that's where they belong.

[Anastasis 23717]

45 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

Did you guys hear George Washington owned slaves!!?!

Hey, what's a little white supremacy between friends?

[David Dennison 19569]

Have you guys heard about Thomas Jefferson?

[Anastasis 23717]

52 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

It was very common for his time.

Someone will probably say something like this in the future when they are talking about the current genocide. 

Edited March 24 by Anastasis

[Brisketexan 107012]

I'd not heard or read that quote, but it fits his actions.
He was the 20th Century promoter of colonization conquest in Ireland and Palestine. He employed an army of brutal thugs in both places to act against the indigenous people. 
The more you know about him (I still don't know a lot) the more he seems kind of like a Reagan for the Brits except he was smart and served his country in the field. His main service to the UK seems to have been his use as a poster boy for British resistance and perseverance which did help his country. His problem seems to have been that he didn't give a shit about helping or tolerating anyone else.

Yep.
Don’t ever, ever dig down deeply into the story of any “hero” of you want him to REMAIN a hero. You won’t like what you find. Humans make for lousy heroes.
Churchill was a great man. Who was also deeply shitty. Switch his name out for any of a thousand “great men” you can think of, and the sentence still works.

[BrickHorn 18450]

I chuckled this morning at the ironic condescension of posters equating slavery — a practice that was abolished in the US 160 years ago — with a colonialist policy that continues to this day. Y’all motherfuckers need Jesus analogical reasoning practice. 

[RomaVicta 30624]

5 hours ago, TreatyOak said:

While he certainly had his flaws, his views on racial superiority were very common for his time. And while he was no great military strategist, he rightly perceived the biggest threats to Western civilization in Hitler and Stalin. Without his resolve, we could be living in a much worse world today. 

Hitler and Stalin were hardly subtle threats. I gave him credit for his resolve and emotional leadership.

His view on racial superiority that was (is) all too common is one of the reasons nobody wanted to go to war with Germany over the extermination of the Jews. As you likely know, there was a strong, pro-Nazi fascist contingent among the elites of the UK. Germany and Japan did not become enemies to fight until they attacked the would-be Allies. Churchill responded to attack which was natural and represented the consensus of England to resist.

I don't know what the world would be like without Churchill's resolve. Germany was doomed when their attempt to seize the Soviet Union was halted. Russia was defeating the Wehrmacht without the Western front being opened. I think it's 8 of 10 German soldiers who died in WW2 were killed by the Red Army. 

I'm not sure Churchill's resolve does the trick for England if the Japanese don't bomb Pearl Harbor and Germany does not declare war on the US. The Royal Navy would have prevented any invasion of the British Isles as it had done for centuries. England would have had to just take the battering of the Luftwaffe and missiles until Germany fell.

Churchill was a terrific symbol. Please have the last word. I'm sure nobody needs to read any more on the subject from me. Thanks for your response.

[David Dennison 19569]

2 hours ago, BrickHorn said:

I chuckled this morning at the ironic condescension of posters equating slavery — a practice that was abolished in the US 160 years ago — with a colonialist policy that continues to this day. Y’all motherfuckers need Jesus analogical reasoning practice. 

And yet, the effects of slavery linger in the United States 160 years later.

[BrickHorn 18450]

Just now, David Dennison said:

And yet, the effects of slavery linger in the United States 160 years later.

Yes, of course. And the effects of settler colonialism on Palestine will linger long after that policy ends, which may happen at some point. 

[AnTiM 1695]

42 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Hitler and Stalin were hardly subtle threats. I gave him credit for his resolve and emotional leadership.

His view on racial superiority that was (is) all too common is one of the reasons nobody wanted to go to war with Germany over the extermination of the Jews. As you likely know, there was a strong, pro-Nazi fascist contingent among the elites of the UK. Germany and Japan did not become enemies to fight until they attacked the would-be Allies. Churchill responded to attack which was natural and represented the consensus of England to resist.

I don't know what the world would be like without Churchill's resolve. Germany was doomed when their attempt to seize the Soviet Union was halted. Russia was defeating the Wehrmacht without the Western front being opened. I think it's 8 of 10 German soldiers who died in WW2 were killed by the Red Army. 

I'm not sure Churchill's resolve does the trick for England if the Japanese don't bomb Pearl Harbor and Germany does not declare war on the US. The Royal Navy would have prevented any invasion of the British Isles as it had done for centuries. England would have had to just take the battering of the Luftwaffe and missiles until Germany fell.

Churchill was a terrific symbol. Please have the last word. I'm sure nobody needs to read any more on the subject from me. Thanks for your response.

My favorite quote attributed to Churchill is the one where a female rival motioned him toward a doorway and said "Age before beauty".  As he stepped inside he replied "Pearls before swine".

[Smax 3800]

Yeah, I'm not a fan of presentism

[TreatyOak 17410]

3 hours ago, RomaVicta said:

Hitler and Stalin were hardly subtle threats. I gave him credit for his resolve and emotional leadership.

His view on racial superiority that was (is) all too common is one of the reasons nobody wanted to go to war with Germany over the extermination of the Jews. As you likely know, there was a strong, pro-Nazi fascist contingent among the elites of the UK. Germany and Japan did not become enemies to fight until they attacked the would-be Allies. Churchill responded to attack which was natural and represented the consensus of England to resist.

I don't know what the world would be like without Churchill's resolve. Germany was doomed when their attempt to seize the Soviet Union was halted. Russia was defeating the Wehrmacht without the Western front being opened. I think it's 8 of 10 German soldiers who died in WW2 were killed by the Red Army. 

I'm not sure Churchill's resolve does the trick for England if the Japanese don't bomb Pearl Harbor and Germany does not declare war on the US. The Royal Navy would have prevented any invasion of the British Isles as it had done for centuries. England would have had to just take the battering of the Luftwaffe and missiles until Germany fell.

Churchill was a terrific symbol. Please have the last word. I'm sure nobody needs to read any more on the subject from me. Thanks for your response.

Thanks for a great post. Random thoughts below. 

Hitler and Stalin were hardly subtle threats. I gave him credit for his resolve and emotional leadership. It can never be stated enough, especially the threat that Stalin represented before and after the war. Sadly, FDR was fairly blind to the Russian threat but Truman stood up to them.  

His view on racial superiority that was (is) all too common is one of the reasons nobody wanted to go to war with Germany over the extermination of the Jews. As you likely know, there was a strong, pro-Nazi fascist contingent among the elites of the UK. Germany and Japan did not become enemies to fight until they attacked the would-be Allies. Churchill responded to attack which was natural and represented the consensus of England to resist. True about the fascist support for Hitler, even all over Europe. Like today, it was quite popular, with many fascist dictatorships across the continent. Churchill was one of the early identifiers of the threat Hitler posed and also always hated Stalin. 

I don't know what the world would be like without Churchill's resolve. Germany was doomed when their attempt to seize the Soviet Union was halted. Russia was defeating the Wehrmacht without the Western front being opened. I think it's 8 of 10 German soldiers who died in WW2 were killed by the Red Army. Always worth repeating that we supplied aircraft, trucks, jeeps, and most importantly, food for the Red Army. Did you know the first Russian tanks into Berlin were Shermans? Crazy stat: Russians SHOT almost as many of their own soldiers for cowardice than we had total combat deaths. The Russians continued to attack the Japanese in Manchuria AFTER the Japanese has surrendered to seize as much land as possible. They even demanded occupation of Japan (after fighting the Japanese for a whole week) and we told them to F off.  

I'm not sure Churchill's resolve does the trick for England if the Japanese don't bomb Pearl Harbor and Germany does not declare war on the US. The Royal Navy would have prevented any invasion of the British Isles as it had done for centuries. England would have had to just take the battering of the Luftwaffe and missiles until Germany fell. The Germans were planning on floating their army to England on barges. LOL, a German invasion planner was removed from command for asking if anyone else was concerned that their invasion fleet would cross the Channel slower than Napoleon's would have.

Churchill was a terrific symbol. Please have the last word. I'm sure nobody needs to read any more on the subject from me. Thanks for your response.

[TreatyOak 17410]

3 hours ago, AnTiM said:

My favorite quote attributed to Churchill is the one where a female rival motioned him toward a doorway and said "Age before beauty".  As he stepped inside he replied "Pearls before swine".

My fave Churchill quote about Labour politician Stafford Cripps

“He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire." 
 

[RomaVicta 30624]

15 hours ago, TreatyOak said:

True about the fascist support for Hitler, even all over Europe. Like today, it was quite popular, with many fascist dictatorships across the continent. Churchill was one of the early identifiers of the threat Hitler posed and also always hated Stalin. 

Great post yourself. Thanks. I quote the above because it's so shocking that fascism is once again on the rise. 

I, like most of us, sported the attitude that democracy was the end of an evolutionary process. After the great lesson of WW2 and refighting that war on the lawns of newly suburbaned America plus watching TV that was full of WW2 shows as were the movie theaters, I suppose the lesson was ingrained.

Now I re-learn the usual lessons. Memory fades. Lessons fade. It all fades as part of a cycle.

The process that brought us to democracy was not evolution. It, too, is a cycle. The Greeks had it right as usual: government goes in a cycle. Monarchy, Anarchy, Democracy, Anarchy, Monarchy... (or something like that). It also seems that whichever pops up between autocracy and democracy is always embraced.

[Brisketexan 107012]

20 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Great post yourself. Thanks. I quote the above because it's so shocking that fascism is once again on the rise. 

I, like most of us, sported the attitude that democracy was the end of an evolutionary process. After the great lesson of WW2 and refighting that war on the lawns of newly suburbaned America plus watching TV that was full of WW2 shows as were the movie theaters, I suppose the lesson was ingrained.

Now I re-learn the usual lessons. Memory fades. Lessons fade. It all fades as part of a cycle.

The process that brought us to democracy was not evolution. It, too, is a cycle. The Greeks had it right as usual: government goes in a cycle. Monarchy, Anarchy, Democracy, Anarchy, Monarchy... (or something like that). It also seems that whichever pops up between autocracy and democracy is always embraced.

An article very on-target for your point (Israel is included in this discussion): https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/jan/20/fascism-is-everywhere-on-the-march-and-its-trump-who-sets-the-pace

Quote

The bigger, worldwide picture is more alarming still. Far from being an exception to the rule, Trump reflects, amplifies and popularises a regressive global trend towards authoritarian, totalitarian, dictatorial, nationalistic and religiously, ethnically and culturally majoritarian forms of rightwing governance.

To put it more simply, fascism is once more on the march – and liberal democracy risks being trampled under its marauding boots. Is this a disagreeable hiccup, a passing phase? Or does it herald the start of a post-democratic age?

......

“Enclaves of freedom” still hold out, yet their walls are besieged. India is succumbing to one-man rule, beguiled by the intolerant Hindu nationalism of Narendra Modi. Israel’s democracy is presently self-destructing. In Africa, coups abound. In Europe, Emmanuel Macron, France’s president, scrambled to shore up the national project last week against a surging far-right tide.

In Germany, Italy and Hungary, much the same struggle against a reviving fascism is being fought (or conceded). So much so that Germany’s chancellor, Olaf Scholz, joined street protesters to urge resistance to the anti-migrant, Nazi-linked Alternative for Germany party. In the UK, alienation and an anachronistic voting system turn elections into charades.

In such countries, the battle is not yet over. But unity of purpose is lacking. As in the US, parliamentary and public institutions are weak and discredited. If Americans such as Iowa’s caucus-goers, relatively prosperous and secure, do not stand up for democracy and reject its subversive, disruptive foes, what hope is there for the rest?

In truth, not much. The liberal moment, it appears, is passing; the fascist nightmare looms anew. Under darkly lowering skies, the post-democratic age dawns.

Or, for the TLDR version....what us ledge-dwellers have been saying for going on 10 years now.

[Brian Fantana 6875]

You guys are fucking great at staying on topic, by the way.

[Brisketexan 107012]

Just now, Brian Fantana said:

You guys are fucking great at staying on topic, by the way.

[Gatorubet 30787]

The US just refused to veto a resolution calling for a cease-fire in Palestine. The Israelis are unhappy and Bibi has canceled a visit to DC.

[Brisketexan 107012]

Just now, Gatorubet said:

The US just refused to veto a resolution calling for a cease-fire in Palestine. The Israelis are unhappy and Bibi has canceled a visit to DC.

Israel needs to figure out their role in this relationship, or GTFO.  Not that Biden can make that move pre-election, because god is this country stupid about Israel, but Israel is making its choice clear.  That's not how an ally acts, and WTF are we getting out of this alliance anyway (other than all the necessary Dominionist shit so Jerusalem and the jews can be around for the fucking Rapture with Kirk Cameron and shit)?

[InkaUtexas 26948]

This is Israel saying its my ball and I am going home. But it is not theirs. We pay for a lot of it.

This is the time you GO AND TALK. Sulking is not the way to make this work. There should be a ceasefire. Yes Hamas will use it to entrench. But Israel will use it to reequip, rotate and rest forces. But at least the civilian get a break during their most holy of months.

[chainsaw 10308]

Israel has always been a fake friend and Bibi openly wants to see Trump re-elected. Fuck him.

[Satchel 6983]

16 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

This is Israel saying its my ball and I am going home. But it is not theirs. We pay for a lot of it.

This is the time you GO AND TALK. Sulking is not the way to make this work. There should be a ceasefire. Yes Hamas will use it to entrench. But Israel will use it to reequip, rotate and rest forces. But at least the civilian get a break during their most holy of months.

Bibi is banking on Putin and Xi colluding with him to get Trump re-elected.

[InkaUtexas 26948]

Just now, Satchel said:

Bibi is banking on Putin and Xi colluding with him to get Trump re-elected.

Don't think it is Putin and Xi. He is going to push towards the hardline pro-Israel population here in the US. And it is funny, don't think many would vote for Biden either way.

[mdmost 44110]

26 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

The US just refused to veto a resolution calling for a cease-fire in Palestine. The Israelis are unhappy and Bibi has canceled a visit to DC.

Good. I didn't want that piece of shit speaking to Congress and trying to ignore what Biden is asking of Israel. I'm typically team Israel but they have to be forced to agree to the ceasefire. 

[TreatyOak 17410]

3 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

An article very on-target for your point (Israel is included in this discussion): https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/jan/20/fascism-is-everywhere-on-the-march-and-its-trump-who-sets-the-pace

Or, for the TLDR version....what us ledge-dwellers have been saying for going on 10 years now.

Democracy is always at a disadvantage. The very nature of being tolerant puts you at a disadvantage against people who are willing to use a democratic system to seize power, and install a totalitarian regime. The Nazis were a prime example of this, as were the Bolsheviks. I can see Trump and his minions using the courts to have him declared president for life. 

[BrickHorn 18450]

11 minutes ago, mdmost said:

I'm typically team Israel

Why?

[Ghost of LL 15705]

17 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

Why?

I don't want to speak for @mdmost, but I also have generally been sympathetic to Israel.  And for a long time, there were good justifications for that sympathy. 

From a national-interest standpoint, Israel was a staunch ally in the Eastern Mediterranean facing Soviet-backed enemies.  Its position near Suez and straddling the Eastern Med into the Middle East makes it strategically important.  And in the binary world of the Cold War, if it wasn't going to be our ally, it was going to be the Soviets'.  

From an emotional standpoint, yeah--it's easy to agree that the Jews ought to have a safe space given the unpleasantries of not just the past century, but the centuries before that.  And as one of the sponsors of the establishment of that safe space (along with the rest of the UNSC), we owe some obligation to ensure that it remains safe.

But those justifications are rapidly fading into the ether of history.  The Cold War is over.  And while the Soviet threat is somewhat replaced by threats from China and Russia, Israel is not exactly a reliable ally in any sort of anti-Russian or anti-Chinese bloc.  As we try to build alliances in the region to address regional threats, Israel is often more of a hinderance than a help.

And while creating a safe space for Jews in the Levant made sense, I don't think we ever signed up to support a starvation genocide of the Palestinian Arabs.  And if we did, we ought to un-sign right the fuck now.  Because "Never Again" shouldn't be read as "Never Again to us, but maybe it's ok if it's by us against some other group."

When Secretary Blinken was in Jerusalem last week, the Israelis announced the largest seizure of Palestinian land in the West Bank since 1993, with the land to be converted into settlements.  That's not how you treat the foreign minister of your most important ally.  And now Israel isn't sending a delegation that was summoned by the United States?  As @Brisketexan asks, what exactly does Israel think the power dynamic is in this relationship?

Israel obviously thinks that the United States is some sort of vassal state that owes it an unquestioning obligation to supply it arms and money in times of war.  Israel should be disabused of that notion.  If Israel wants to be an ally, then it can start acting like a fucking ally.  But if it wants to be our feudal lord, then fuck that--we ought to declare our independence and cut Israel off.

[JohnnyRage 1617]

1 hour ago, Gatorubet said:

The US just refused to veto a resolution calling for a cease-fire in Palestine. The Israelis are unhappy and Bibi has canceled a visit to DC.

Yet their Defense Minister is here right now negotiating another arms deal and insisting that it be done in an expedited manner.

Less than 1 month into the counter invasion our government spelled out in in-house communications that the Israelis were not having regard for minimizing civilian casualties, yet we’ve brokered over 100 arms deals with Israel since October 7th.

The power dynamics are clear, Israel is telling us what they are going to do with our weapons and know that the infrastructure of their politics have been so perfectly imbedded into our divided nation that they can hold their hands out for more while simultaneously telling us to pound sand.

[locodos 5593]

17 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

I don't want to speak for @mdmost, but I also have generally been sympathetic to Israel.  And for a long time, there were good justifications for that sympathy. 

From a national-interest standpoint, Israel was a staunch ally in the Eastern Mediterranean facing Soviet-backed enemies.  Its position near Suez and straddling the Eastern Med into the Middle East makes it strategically important.  And in the binary world of the Cold War, if it wasn't going to be our ally, it was going to be the Soviets'.  

From an emotional standpoint, yeah--it's easy to agree that the Jews ought to have a safe space given the unpleasantries of not just the past century, but the centuries before that.  And as one of the sponsors of the establishment of that safe space (along with the rest of the UNSC), we owe some obligation to ensure that it remains safe.

But those justifications are rapidly fading into the ether of history.  The Cold War is over.  And while the Soviet threat is somewhat replaced by threats from China and Russia, Israel is not exactly a reliable ally in any sort of anti-Russian or anti-Chinese bloc.  As we try to build alliances in the region to address regional threats, Israel is often more of a hinderance than a help.

And while creating a safe space for Jews in the Levant made sense, I don't think we ever signed up to support a starvation genocide of the Palestinian Arabs.  And if we did, we ought to un-sign right the fuck now.  Because "Never Again" shouldn't be read as "Never Again to us, but maybe it's ok if it's by us against some other group."

When Secretary Blinken was in Jerusalem last week, the Israelis announced the largest seizure of Palestinian land in the West Bank since 1993, with the land to be converted into settlements.  That's not how you treat the foreign minister of your most important ally.  And now Israel isn't sending a delegation that was summoned by the United States?  As @Brisketexan asks, what exactly does Israel think the power dynamic is in this relationship?

Israel obviously thinks that the United States is some sort of vassal state that owes it an unquestioning obligation to supply it arms and money in times of war.  Israel should be disabused of that notion.  If Israel wants to be an ally, then it can start acting like a fucking ally.  But if it wants to be our feudal lord, then fuck that--we ought to declare our independence and cut Israel off.

^ Cosigned

Don't forget Israel has also been doing a non trivial amount of spying on the US and has been doing so for many years with virtual impunity.  

I assume that Israel thinks that the Jewish population in the US is an effective lever to coerce, cajole, and perhaps control the political parties. Or, at a minimum, to temper their reactions to provocative Israeli policy.

I do wonder with Florida leaning more solidly Republican and New York solidly Democrat if Israel still feels that they can move the needle in a presidential/national election.  

I don't claim to have any insight beyond that of an average Joe, but I do know that Israel has problem that will force them to make some tough decisions. Embrace a version of apartheid or have the policies of Israel increasingly shaped by citizens that don't share their religious beliefs.  Israeli citizens classified as Arab are out breeding Jews in Israel and are already 21% of the population.   I heard a news story about this trend in the late 90's and evidently it's a real issue.   What is a Jewish religious state to do when a large portion of their citizens are not Jewish?  Moderate or Subjugate... and it looks like Israel is not embracing moderation.

[RomaVicta 30624]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

Israel needs to figure out their role in this relationship, or GTFO.  Not that Biden can make that move pre-election, because god is this country stupid about Israel, but Israel is making its choice clear.  That's not how an ally acts, and WTF are we getting out of this alliance anyway (other than all the necessary Dominionist shit so Jerusalem and the jews can be around for the fucking Rapture with Kirk Cameron and shit)?

Compliments.

Same for @Ghost of LL

Edit a last time to add that I'm not anti-Israel per se. I think Brisket and Ghost represent much of my history of opinion of Israel. Heroic underdogs to imperial power.

I'm sick that we abandon Ukraine who have won my support the same way Israel did at the beginning. Ukraine fights for its right to exist, but the GЯP shames us all terribly as we let another worthy ally down as we trend toward being...well, we all see the trend.

 

 

Edited March 25 by RomaVicta

[JohnnyRage 1617]

17 minutes ago, locodos said:

Israeli citizens classified as Arab are out breeding Jews in Israel and are already 21% of the population.   I heard a news story about this trend in the late 90's and evidently it's a real issue.   What is a Jewish religious state to do when a large portion of their citizens are not Jewish?  

Breeding? Arab citizens are closer to 17% according to this link. And birth rates are more or less the same now between Jews and Arabs in Israel, in addition to economic prosperity probably thanks in part to the ultra-orthodox that are exempt from some social aspects like serving in the military and education.

It doesn't feel like the American  Jewish population is the ballast. Trump rails against American Jews as traitors. It’s the lobbying grift and Christian conservatives hoping for Armageddon times.

 

Quote

In the past, the overall fertility rate among Arab women in Israel was almost twice as high as that among Jewish women. Over the last two decades, this rate has fallen steadily, and the gap between Arab and Jewish women has largely disappeared. Today, the fertility rate among Jewish women (3.09) is similar to that among Muslim women. This is mainly due to a change in social patterns, including higher levels of education, the integration of Arab women into the workforce, a higher average age at first marriage (along with prolonged singlehood), and the abandonment of traditional lifestyles.

 

https://en.idi.org.il/articles/38540

 

 

 

 

Edited March 25 by JohnnyRage
link and quote