About Obama's Even Temper... | Following up on Trickle-Down Equanimity
Leslie Savan
Posted at 5:05 PM ET
Another Woman Senator From New York? | NOW, Feminist Majority endorse Carolyn Maloney to replace Clinton.
John Nichols
Posted at 4:04 PM ET
Realizing the Promise | A people's inauguration
Christopher Hayes
Posted at 3:32 PM ET
Obama's Gaffe on India | He ought to be urging India to talk to Pakistan, not cross the border to "catch" the bad guys.
Robert Dreyfuss
Bread, Bombs, and the Big Stimulus | We need a smart and focused inside-outside strategy to revive our frayed social compact -- now more critical than ever.
Katrina vanden Heuvel
Can you help "Nickie"? | Bringing the abortion debate down to earth
Katha Pollitt
DC to Delhi: Only Our Missiles -- Not Yours | What is Rice going to say to India: only DC not Delhi is allowed to bomb Pakistan?
Laura Flanders
World AIDS Day | How to help in the fight against the AIDS pandemic.
Peter Rothberg
Forget GM's Plan -- Where's The Government's Plan? | Create a demand for green cars.
Jane Hamsher
RSS
Hard choice, as all would occur except firmly established borders for Israel. As for being "perceived" as an apartheid state, that's only half of it, as Israel would in unavoidable fact, and not merely in perception, become precisely that, an enforcer of apartheid. US critics of the annexation & the walls, & of the apartheid laws & procedures needed to maintain both, would be labeled anti-semitic, and, if sufficiently prominent, find their careers destroyed by AIPAC assets.
Posted by sloper at 05/31/2007
WHO CARES WHAT ISRAEL WILL BE "PERCEIVED AS"...
Certainly not the Israelis, evidently. Therefore, the rest of the world's "perceptions" are not going to amount to a hill of beans (let alone the Golan Heights) as far as changing Israeli policy is concerned. (I consider myself a fairly extreme left liberal shading into socialist, but, frankly, I could give less of a shit about the "perceptions" arguments. Very few countries -- not only the U.S. under Bush -- seem to give much of a shit either about what "the rest of the world" thinks.)
At any rate, Israeli, with measures like The Wall, is actually making things more DANGEROUS for herself, not safer. The Wall is almost certain to increase Palestinian violence against Israel and is pretty much a futile waste of money (much of it donated by the Bush administration, no doubt, which is working on a Wall of its own in Baghdad, inspired, no doubt, by Israel's example).
Posted by w_m_bear at 05/31/2007
There are many and serious reasons for objecting to the way Israel is drawing de facto boundaries with a Palestinian state that doesn't yet exist. Most serious of these is the concessions made to the territorial ambitions of the settler movement and its still seething vision of creating, as much as possible, a Greater Israel on Palestinian land.
That said, however, the idea of creating a border, per se, and quitting entirely the lands on the other side of it, remains an utterly reasonable one, especially if the line is drawn so as to give the Palestinians the lands on the other side of the Green Line, or nearly so, without any residual civil or military authority remaining to the Israeli government. This was the originial ideal behind the Fence, and it had the near universal support of the Israeli population, right and lifet. It amounts to nothing moe than physically incarnating a two state solution.
The tantrums that now appear in the nation are essentially the same old Arab rejectionism with a new set of crocodile tears. Note that the core of the objection is not that the Fence is a bad Fence or that it follows a route dictated by territorial greed; those would be flaws easily remediable by political negotiation between parties favoring a two-state plan. The objection is to any FEnce whatever because it is an objection to any border whatever. What lies behind that, obvious to anyone not blinded by the persiflage passing for anlaysis among the intellectually-bedraggled left, is simply the desire to use the demographic leverage of the Arab population to efface the Jewish state and replace it by one no less Arab in essential character than Lebanon or Jordan. It is also obvious that the route thus advocated will lead to an ongoing bloodbath more reminiscent of Rwanda than of anything that has ever happened in Palestine.
It is curious how little the left has been willing to learn the lesson of the Gaza withdrawal. It doesn't accord with the usual fairy-tale mythology and therefoe is not allowed to leave an impression on the innoculated mind of the ideologue. But recall the fact: a complete evacuation of a key piece of Palestinian territory, down to the last Jew, a plan in place for economic development and trade sufficient to sustain the Gaza opulation and even accord it a degree of prosperity, and all this done at considerabvle political cost to the Israeli regime.
What happened, as a matter of irrefutable material fact? The Palestinian factions that controllled real power instantly turned the Strip into a launching pad for missile attacks, escalating the manufacture and use of Qassams by an enormous factor.
This, of course put the left into the position of scrambling around for a rationalization blaming the Israelis--not a very hopeful venture, but given the sorry mindset of the left, quite inevitable. The same confused herd animals now step forth blaring their tin horns and banging their broken drums, declaring a two-state solution impossible. The only material beneficiaries of such a charade are the forces on the Issraeli right for whom the patent bankruptcy of the left merely enhances the chances of further land-grabs.
Posted by fossil at 05/31/2007
Fred Thompson writes: "Let me ask you a hypothetical question. What do you think America would do if Canadian soldiers were firing dozens of missiles every day into Buffalo, N.Y.? What do you think our response would be if Mexican troops for two years had launched daily rocket attacks on San Diego -- and bragged about it?"
He sums up his very interesting commentary with the following: "The Iranian regime has left little doubt that it intends to see Israel "wiped off the map.” Hamas is using the same language, not coincidentally, and has announced it will begin launching missiles into Israel from the West Bank too. If the world doesn't act to stop Iran's nuclear ambitions, it must be prepared for the consequences of Israel defending itself."
Israel will be perceived as an apartheid state?! Only a fool would utter that.
Posted by Freiheit at 05/31/2007
Fred Thompson writes: "Let me ask you a hypothetical question. What do you think America would do if Canadian soldiers were firing dozens of missiles every day into Buffalo, N.Y.? What do you think our response would be if Mexican troops for two years had launched daily rocket attacks on San Diego -- and bragged about it?"
He sums up his very interesting commentary with the following: "The Iranian regime has left little doubt that it intends to see Israel "wiped off the map.” Hamas is using the same language, not coincidentally, and has announced it will begin launching missiles into Israel from the West Bank too. If the world doesn't act to stop Iran's nuclear ambitions, it must be prepared for the consequences of Israel defending itself."
Israel will be perceived as an apartheid state?! Only a fool would utter that.
Posted by Freiheit at 05/31/2007
Fred Thompson writes: "Let me ask you a hypothetical question. What do you think America would do if Canadian soldiers were firing dozens of missiles every day into Buffalo, N.Y.? What do you think our response would be if Mexican troops for two years had launched daily rocket attacks on San Diego -- and bragged about it?"
He sums up his very interesting commentary with the following: "The Iranian regime has left little doubt that it intends to see Israel "wiped off the map.” Hamas is using the same language, not coincidentally, and has announced it will begin launching missiles into Israel from the West Bank too. If the world doesn't act to stop Iran's nuclear ambitions, it must be prepared for the consequences of Israel defending itself."
Israel will be perceived as an apartheid state?! Only a fool would utter that.
Posted by Freiheit at 05/31/2007
haha, sorry for the multiple posts. Didn't notice the time stamp flukes.
Posted by Freiheit at 05/31/2007
FOSSIL -- WH0 PAYS YOU...
To post your idiocy and how much? Or is it just that none of the conservative Web sites even ALLOWS comments?
Posted by w_m_bear at 05/31/2007
Three things will happen when Israel completes its barrier and walls Palestinians into a ghetto:
An upsurge in Palestinian violence against Israel.
The death of the two-state solution.
Israel will be perceived as an apartheid state.
Posted by ARCHANGEL_M at 06/1/2007
Why is it that the two obvious outcomes (suppression of Palestinian terror, established borders) got 12% of the votes between them, whereas 51% think Israel "will be perceived as an apartheid state"? Let's be honest here. We're talking about walling off the suicide bombers, and setting down concrete to protect Israel. It's a shame this had to happen, but it seems to be a pragmatic idea. If that constitutes "apartheid," then I'm completely lost.
Posted by antiPartisa at 06/2/2007
We're talking about walling off the suicide bombers, and setting down concrete to protect Israel. It's a shame this had to happen, but it seems to be a pragmatic idea. If that constitutes "apartheid," then I'm completely lost.
Posted by ANTIPARTISA 06/02/2007 @ 11:06pm
I think many of us whose reaction to the Israeli Wall is "bad idea" think so not because we want to see suicide bombers doing their thing but because it simply won't be effective in accomplishing the prevention of this while, at the same time, adding to the misery and strife among both Palestinians and Israelis. You can't wall out a whole people who basically occupy the same space you do.
BTW, in pro-Wall PR (which means most of the unconscious U.S. mass media), it's called "the Fence," as though it were just harmless sections of chain-link like what farmers and ranchers use to mark their territory and keep animals from straying. It's much, MUCH heavier than just a "Fence," folks.
Posted by w_m_bear at 06/3/2007
"He that soweth the wind shall reap the whirlwind."
--Proverbs (KJV)
Posted by w_m_bear at 06/3/2007
What I and most American media have usually referred to as "the Wall" is, surprisingly to me, referred to as "the Fence" in Israel and by Israelis. The mindset is not of a wall, walling people out, but of a security fence, delimiting a secure (or secured) area.
Posted by llfilmbuff at 06/3/2007
Let me ask you a hypothetical question: What would we do if Russia or China decided to give the United States to Mexico or Canada...they come in - wipe out our Military - bulldoze our houses - make us 3rd class citizens and say, "You can all have Tennessee and Missouri - but we will control your electricity, water, and determine who you can have as your representatives."? How would we, as Patriotic citizens, (with no military in this scenario) react to this? How would we feel about Russia or China, especially if they were supporting the occupying forces' military? I don't support "suicide bombings" but lets keep it in perspective. I understand why there are hostilities towards who we choose to support and how we choose to support them.
Posted by liveundead at 06/4/2007
I don't know how I'd react. Besides, I don't get the whole "matyrdom" shit; nor do I buy the idea that grisly suicide bombings come from "despair." It's evil nihilism. These people have moral choices; they are human beings. How would I react, this is a good question. If my homeland was under foreign occupation, with a long, mixed-up history that surrounds it, hard to say. We are just so far removed from this, save our government aid, small NGOs, etc. If the wall (btw I remember clearly a fairly heated argument with a high school classmate, a Jew like me, who insisted it's a "fence" and wouldn't budge on even that semantic point) were repositioned to the '67 Green Line, no problem, right?
Posted by antiPartisa at 06/4/2007
Israel will no doubt be perceived as an Apartheid state whether or not that is the reality of the situation or not. In fact, Israel could tear down the wall, throw away all their weapons, put on pink uniforms and stroll down the streets of Arab towns handing out flowers and still be perceived as an Apartheid state. The wave of anti-semitism is growing again and the Israelis would serve themselves a great deal by coming to grips with the fact that they are not hated because of what they do but because of who they are. They must also remember that every civilization that has attempted to wipe them out has ended up in the trash bin of history and stand strong on the fact that they are the greater moral power in this conflict.
The fence/wall is not a permanent solution but if it helps to cut down on they amount of terrorist attacks then I do not see an alternative at this time. Besides, anyone who understands the history of the region knows that the Palestinian people are being used as pawns by the other Arab nations and are being kept in poverty as a weapon against the Israelis.
Posted by blackhawk23 at 06/4/2007
The wall in Israel will not solve a thing as long as Israel continues to oppress the Palestinian people. I have no sympathy for Israelis: They have brought the Palestinian troubles upon themselves by stealing their land and livelihoods, and by forcing the Palestinians to live in squalid ghettos with no economic base. Which came first, the Chicken or the Egg? is no longer relevant. What matters now is to attempt the Quixotic goal of establishing a two-state solution which compensates Palestinians for their loss of land and allows access for all to the sacred sites in the area. Of course, the Palestinians will have to accept the Israelis as well, but that is what makes the whole mess so Quixotic. The "beast" (and totally abhorrent) solution would be to just nuke the whole damned place! At least then, it would all be over at once. These people seem to enjoy killing one another: We should stop supporting ANY of them, and embargo the whole area, and just let them duke it out amongst themselves.
Posted by PlaynBass at 06/5/2007
When I think of all the walls and fences I climbed when I was a kid -- some of them 20 or more feet high, climbing to the roof of my junior high school, or onto the top of a supermarket -- all I can see when I picture the Israeli wall is either 1) Berlin; or 2) me, standing on my bicycle and climbing over it, "just because it's there".
Posted by Bill Siegel at 06/6/2007
The fact is the separation barrier has REDUCED the violence visited upon Isrelis by Palestinians. The fact is the evacuation of Gaza by Israel has INCREASED the violence visited upon Isrealis by Palestinians. This evacuation has also resulted in a vast increase in the violence visited upon Palestinians by Palestinians. The sad fact is that the only thing preventing the duplication of chaos occuring in Gaza from spreading to the West Bank is the Israeli occupation. This is not to say that occupation is a good thing. I wish that it would be replaced by a peace settlement, as unlikely as that appears today. However it is a sad commentary on Palestinian leadership. If Palestinians were more concerned with building their own state and less concerned with Israelis having no state, their lives would improve considerably.
Posted by rmis32 at 06/6/2007
When they finally finish the wall, I hope someone has the courage to graffiti "Arbeit Macht Frei" over one of the gates.
Posted by redleb at 06/7/2007
What I and most American media have usually referred to as "the Wall" is, surprisingly to me, referred to as "the Fence" in Israel and by Israelis. The mindset is not of a wall, walling people out, but of a security fence, delimiting a secure (or secured) area.
Posted by LLFILMBUFF 06/03/2007 @ 9:33pm
WHAT DID I SAY?
Posted by w_m_bear at 06/7/2007
Israel is already an apartheid state. Those in this forum who label as anti-semitic any who say this are really only betraying their own racist impulses.
As for the wall, how many times must it be noted that if Israel were building the wall on its own land, there would be little cause for complaint. But the wall is built almost entirely on Palestinian land.
Israel steals Palestinian land, steals Palestinian water, destroys Palestian homes and livelihood, and murders Palestinians. And still Israel's apologists express disbelieve that anyone would object to Israeli occupation.
Using the reasoning of Israel's apologists -- that attacks justify retaliation -- Palestinians are justified in vastly great violence against the institutions of the Israeli apartheid state.
Posted by HuSan at 06/8/2007
Husan, no one is trying to be hypothetical here. Encirclement and annexation of West Bank territory is happening, that is correct. It goes beyond the pale, however, to say that Israel is an apartheid state; it simply isn't true. It must be stressed, for the interest of accuracy, that the separation wall is not "built almost entirely on Palestinian land," as you claim. Even B'Tselem claims that a good figure would be about 10% of the West Bank, as the wall is presently planned.
I also think that in saying that "Palestinians are justified in vastly great violence against the institutions of the Israeli apartheid state," that implies support for the only means they find at their disposal, i.e. suicide bombings against civilian targets, correct? The militants who are going to supply your resistance believe all Israelis are complicit some way or another with your "apartheid state," so how does your prescription translate here?
Posted by antiPartisa at 06/11/2007
Israel is a criminal nation, period. We should be imposing sanctions, not rendering assistance.I am however, more worried about jewish influences in our civil rights organizations, so-called left leaning publications here in the US, including this one, and our government. The manipulation techniques are how issues are framed, and the topic covered. Lets see more critical coverage of Israel here at the nation. I dare you.
Posted by badlawdog at 06/11/2007
The United States should say to Israel "if you continue to build your wall, bulldoze Palastinian homes, and occupy arab lands we will not only stop giving you billions in foreign aid and military technology, but we will begin arming the Palastinians. And you can tell AIPAC to forget about every seeing Jonathan Pollard free. He will rot in prison for the rest of his life.
Posted by simpson9764 at 06/12/2007
The anti-zionists and Jew haters of the world can post all the garbage they want. Right now Fatah and Hamas are killing themselves, Lebanese soldiers are killing Islamic radicals in the Palestinian refugee camps and Sunnis and Shiites are slaughtering each other in Iraq with the help of Iran and Syria. Now I would never cast aspersions on the intelligence of Muslims but I don't think Israel has anything at all to worry about.
Posted by bean22 at 06/12/2007
The worst President ever? It is always the one who is in office when the question is asked. Especially when it is asked by a Liberal publication when a conservative president is in office.
Obviously there is no way that W can have anything other then a failed presidency because of Iraq. Even though his predecessor left him a recession (which we are not in despite 9/11 and the corporate scandals); a plunging stock market (that is back to near record highs); increasing unemployment (yet we now have numbers Kennedy and Carter would have died for). Bush has done far more than Clinton for national security, energy, AIDS, and education though those of you who hate him will never admit that. He gets the blame for Katrina and New Orleans when the blame for the failed levees is the fault of presidents over the last 40 years and the great loss of life was due to the total inaction of that racist moron Ray Nagin and his corrupt officials.
And how quickly we forget what a disaster Carter was as a president. The anti-semitic peanut farmer with the peanut brain who gave us 22% interest rates, the Iran hostage fiasco and a foreign policy that almost guaranteed we would be in the present world war III we are in now
And does anyone really think that Reagan contracted Alzheimers the day he left office? The man spent his entire 2nd term doing nothing but waving at us to and from his helicopter and cupping his ear from the noise as the excuse why he couldn't answer any questions.
And although Bush is far from a rocket scientist, the real reason he is such a poor president is that he is so weak. He is insecure and frightened and that is very dangerous in any leader, let alone the leader of a major country. I am sure he goes to bed every night in a fetal position with his thumb in his mouth and Laura assuring him that everything is going to work out. His unwillingness to criticize or fire anyone, his stubbornness and inability to compromise are all signs of weakness, not strength. He is a weak man, put into office by powerful men who do not allow him to make any decisions on his own. We've had other presidents who were not too bright and just as weak. We survived them, we survived Jimmy Carter and I am hoping we will survive Bush II.
Posted by bean22 at 06/12/2007
Bean22, with all honesty (by my modest calculation) about 1 out of the 17 commenters here (thus far) have made genuinely antisemitic remarks; I'm referring to those of badlawdog. "Criminal nation"... "jewish influences"... let's get real, and denounce such garbage. And bean22, don't confuse nonsense like that with the principled critiques of the other 94% of us here, yourself included.
Posted by antiPartisa at 06/12/2007