Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest David

In The World: Israel

Recommended Posts

This is refreshing. Maybe some more world leaders will similarly develop a backbone--

British leader Theresa May breaks with John Kerry’s condemnation of Israel

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/britains-leaderbreaks-with-kerrys-condemnation-of-israel/2016/12/30/33371564-ce97-11e6-a87f-b917067331bb_story.html?utm_term=.720f53dd5722

 

Strange considering what she said just a few weeks earlier, which was much more on point:

 

[it is important to be] “honest with our friends, like Israel, because that is what true friendship is about. That is why [britain] has been clear about building new, illegal settlements: it is wrong; it is not conducive to peace; and it must stop.”

 

It's mostly irrelevant, though, because Britain isn't giving Israel billions a year. We need more leaders in this country that realize the need for "honesty" with Israel. And politicians who aren't afraid of upsetting AIPAC by telling it like it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watch how Israelis attacked Palestinian worshippers when they entered Al Aqsa Mosque yesterday. Barbaric...

https://t.co/G9b3A2jesb


"Nearly every problem that we have in the USA -- unaffordable health care, prison overpopulation, hyper militarization, climate change, racism, gun violence, poverty, poor education, urban sprawl and others -- cannot be positively addressed because bribery and conflicts of interest are legal under campaign finance laws which protect the uber-wealthy and the narrow self-interests who grossly benefit from our afflictions."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watch how Israelis attacked Palestinian worshippers when they entered Al Aqsa Mosque yesterday. Barbaric...

https://t.co/G9b3A2jesb

 

Oh KJP, as usual you don't tell the whole story. Here is an article on the situation in Israel.

 

Clashes, tensions flare at sacred site in Jerusalem

 

https://apnews.com/bc318df0d46244868ffd062cf85d74bd/Clashes-erupt-at-Jerusalem-shrine-as-Muslims-return-to-pray

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone else ever read "The Sum of All Fears"?

 

Clancy was virtually a prophet in major ways (use of a jetliner as a weapon) and minor (his first Soviet villain was named "Putin").  If the Palestinians ever tried what he suggested at the Haram al Sharif mosques, he could be again.

 

King Abdullah is no anti-Israel extremist.  Jordan and Israel are strategic allies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has been named as a suspect in two investigations into allegations of “fraud, breach of trust and bribes” with his former chief of staff signing a deal with prosecutors to testify against him:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/04/benjamin-netanyahu-suspect-fraud-investigation-israel-police

 


Opinion piece from the Jerusalem Post:

 

http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Is-this-the-end-for-Netanyahu-501669

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has been named as a suspect in two investigations into allegations of “fraud, breach of trust and bribes” with his former chief of staff signing a deal with prosecutors to testify against him:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/04/benjamin-netanyahu-suspect-fraud-investigation-israel-police

 


Opinion piece from the Jerusalem Post:

 

http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Is-this-the-end-for-Netanyahu-501669

 

That's pretty much how it is there, it's commonplace.

 

Yitzhak Rabin's government was full of it, one key person even got busted later on in Romania.  He's seen as a martyr so that ended that.  Others have been similar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Israel begins telling African migrants to leave

 

CLZxQpkUEAARvmo.jpg

 

Israel began warning thousands of African migrants Sunday that they must leave by the end of March, officials said, under a plan that could see them jailed if they refuse.

 

On January 3, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced implementation of a plan to deport about 38,000 migrants who had entered the country illegally, mainly Eritreans and Sudanese.

 

The controversial plan gives them until the end of next month to leave voluntarily or face jail and eventual expulsion.

 

Immigration authority spokeswoman Sabine Haddad told AFP that officials began issuing migrants letters on Sunday advising them that they had 60 days in which to leave the country voluntarily.

 

For now, the notices are being given only to men without families, officials said.

 

More below:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/israel-begins-telling-african-migrants-to-leave/ar-BBIGwtY


"You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

African asylum seekers told to leave Israel within 60 days

 

The Interior Ministry on Sunday issued thousands of deportation notices to single Eritrean and Sudanese men of working age, demanding that they leave Israel within 60 days for an unspecified third country, or be forcefully removed or imprisoned.

 

However, noting already overcrowded prison conditions, an unidentified senior Israel Prison Service official told the National Security Council that the nation will not be able to house more than 1,000 additional inmates due to a lack of space and funding.

 

More below:

http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/African-asylum-seekers-told-to-leave-Israel-within-60-days-540657

 

413859


"You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Israel corruption scandal: Benjamin Netanyahu defiant over growing calls for him to step down

 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has remained defiant in the face of a long-awaited police recommendation that he be charged with corruption, an announcement that threatens to end his political career.

 

After an investigation lasting more than a year, police said on Tuesday night that the leader should face charges over allegedly receiving lavish and “inappropriate” gifts from wealthy supporters and the reported bribing of a newspaper publisher for favourable coverage.

 

MORE: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israel-corruption-scandal-benjamin-netanyahu-latest-updates-prime-minister-police-charges-resign-a8210646.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BREAKING: The number of Palestinians killed today in Gaza has now increased to 58 - that includes children, women, the disabled, and a paramedic.

 

A total of 2,771 wounded, including 12 journalists and 17 paramedics - with over 1,000 of them being shot.

 

I'm done for today. I've watched/studied hundreds of photos & videos of the worst carnage imaginable.

 

What Israel did today was not just wrong, it was evil and criminal and violates international law and norms.

 

Husbands, fathers, sons, wives, mothers, & daughters -slaughtered.

 


"Nearly every problem that we have in the USA -- unaffordable health care, prison overpopulation, hyper militarization, climate change, racism, gun violence, poverty, poor education, urban sprawl and others -- cannot be positively addressed because bribery and conflicts of interest are legal under campaign finance laws which protect the uber-wealthy and the narrow self-interests who grossly benefit from our afflictions."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Israel was essentially staving off an invasion. From the images I saw, Palestinians appeared to be storming the border, setting fires, hurling bombs over the wall, etc. A novice, ill-prepared force attacking an easily defensible position is typically going to encounter heavy loses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone exclusively blaming one side for yesterday's violence is wrong and cannot see the forest through the trees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Israel was essentially staving off an invasion. From the images I saw, Palestinians appeared to be storming the border, setting fires, hurling bombs over the wall, etc. A novice, ill-prepared force attacking an easily defensible position is typically going to encounter heavy loses.

 

"Storming the border" -- and yet no Palestinians were killed on the Israeli side of the fence, and no Israelis have been injured or killed.  So the large numbers of killed and injured on the Palestinian side seems to be the result of inappropriate application of that overwhelming force superiority that Israel has. 

 

Additionally, a "border" implies that there is a Palestinian state, capable of maintaining law and order, issuing passports, controlling passage through the border, etc.  That's not the case.  Gaza and the West Bank have more similarities to a penal colony or a prison camp than it does to a country.  That "border" is a prison fence. 

 

No doubt, there are bad apples in Gaza and the West Bank.  The current Israeli government policy seems to be to keep pushing the Palestinians into smaller and smaller areas, killing large numbers whenever any of them misbehave.  In other words, Israel punishes the entire population for those criminals' actions, and that is a war crime.

 

The Palestinians have had the Israeli boot on their necks for at least a generation -- can you imagine how the Israelis or Americans would behave in a similar situation? 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BREAKING: The number of Palestinians killed today in Gaza has now increased to 58 - that includes children, women, the disabled, and a paramedic.

 

A total of 2,771 wounded, including 12 journalists and 17 paramedics - with over 1,000 of them being shot.

 

I'm done for today. I've watched/studied hundreds of photos & videos of the worst carnage imaginable.

 

What Israel did today was not just wrong, it was evil and criminal and violates international law and norms.

 

Husbands, fathers, sons, wives, mothers, & daughters -slaughtered.

 

 

Let's also not forget to point the finger at the Gaza leadership in Hamas. They used these people as tools and props for media attention and sent them out to be slaughtered. They were used as human propaganda tools.

 

Note how the activity in Gaza which is situated away from Jerusalem yet governed by a terrorist organization yet the West Bank, which touches Jerusalem and has more moderate leadership,  was pretty quiet yesterday

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BREAKING: The number of Palestinians killed today in Gaza has now increased to 58 - that includes children, women, the disabled, and a paramedic.

 

A total of 2,771 wounded, including 12 journalists and 17 paramedics - with over 1,000 of them being shot.

 

I'm done for today. I've watched/studied hundreds of photos & videos of the worst carnage imaginable.

 

What Israel did today was not just wrong, it was evil and criminal and violates international law and norms.

 

Husbands, fathers, sons, wives, mothers, & daughters -slaughtered.

 

 

Shaun King is a completely unreliable source.  The man can't even be honest about his racial background.

 

Hamas stirred these people up wanting exactly this.  I wouldn't be surprised if some Israeli ultranationalists stirred the pot on their side as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BREAKING: The number of Palestinians killed today in Gaza has now increased to 58 - that includes children, women, the disabled, and a paramedic.

 

A total of 2,771 wounded, including 12 journalists and 17 paramedics - with over 1,000 of them being shot.

 

I'm done for today. I've watched/studied hundreds of photos & videos of the worst carnage imaginable.

 

What Israel did today was not just wrong, it was evil and criminal and violates international law and norms.

 

Husbands, fathers, sons, wives, mothers, & daughters -slaughtered.

 

 

Shaun King is a completely unreliable source.   The man can't even be honest about his racial background.

 

Hamas stirred these people up wanting exactly this.  I wouldn't be surprised if some Israeli ultranationalists stirred the pot on their side as well.

 

So you "wouldn't be surprised" despite providing zero sources or evidence?  But you're upset at KJP's source?  LOL k.

 

https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/14/middleeast/gaza-protests-intl/index.html

 

At least 58 Palestinians died, according to the Palestinian Health Ministry, during protests over the Trump administration's controversial relocation of the Embassy from Tel Aviv, a move that has been praised by Israelis but has enraged Palestinians.

Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It turns out at least 50 of those killed in Gaza were Hamas members, according to Hamas:

 

https://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/50-Hamas-members-reportedly-killed-during-Mondays-Gaza-protests-556627

 

50 members of the Hamas terror organization were among those killed in protests along the Gaza border on Monday, a Hamas spokesperson reportedly said on TV Wednesday...

 

The IDF accuses Hamas of using the protests as cover to carry out terrorist attacks. On Sunday, it said it had identified protesters’ intentions to burn engineering tools belonging to the army, damage security infrastructures on the fence, including pillboxes, as well as attempts to kidnap soldiers under the guise of the protests.

 

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the violence saying that “every nation has the right to defend its borders. Hamas clearly says its intentions are to destroy Israel and sends thousands to break through the border for that end. We will continue to act with resolve to defend our sovereignty and our citizens.”

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where terrorism comes from...

 

Israeli soldier filmed killing wounded Palestinian attacker says he 'has no regrets'

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israel-elor-azaria-defence-forces-soldier-killing-wounded-palestinian-no-regrets-hebron-a8513591.html


"Nearly every problem that we have in the USA -- unaffordable health care, prison overpopulation, hyper militarization, climate change, racism, gun violence, poverty, poor education, urban sprawl and others -- cannot be positively addressed because bribery and conflicts of interest are legal under campaign finance laws which protect the uber-wealthy and the narrow self-interests who grossly benefit from our afflictions."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Nearly every problem that we have in the USA -- unaffordable health care, prison overpopulation, hyper militarization, climate change, racism, gun violence, poverty, poor education, urban sprawl and others -- cannot be positively addressed because bribery and conflicts of interest are legal under campaign finance laws which protect the uber-wealthy and the narrow self-interests who grossly benefit from our afflictions."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/28/middleeast/israel-benjamin-netanyahu-indictment-intl/index.html

 

Quote

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will be indicted on bribery and breach of trust charges arising from three separate corruption investigations, pending a hearing, Israel's attorney general announced Thursday evening.

 


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, DarkandStormy said:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/28/middleeast/israel-benjamin-netanyahu-indictment-intl/index.html

 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will be indicted on bribery and breach of trust charges arising from three separate corruption investigations, pending a hearing, Israel's attorney general announced Thursday evening.

 

"Israeli leader refers to prosecution as 'witch hunt'"

 

🤔  hmm, that sounds familiar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why exactly should anyone care what Juan Cole has to say about anything?  He's basically the poster child for the Islamist-apologist takeover of all major academic departments related to Middle East studies.

 

https://www.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/juan-cole/muhammad/9781568587837/

 

"In the midst of the dramatic seventh-century war between two empires, Muhammad was a spiritual seeker in search of community and sanctuary."

 

Basically, Juan Cole would take the Palestinian side even if they obtained rogue nuclear weapons and wiped Israel off the map.  The world would do a stop-motion double-take on its axis if he ever said a single good thing about Israel.  He's comfortably ensconced in his tenure at UM and will spend the rest of his career there castigating Israel and enjoying the benefits of having chosen a civilized target that doesn't treat its detractors like Salman Rushdie or Ayaan Hirsi Ali ... unlike the religion he favors with the political cover of his activism-academia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Gramarye said:

Why exactly should anyone care what Juan Cole has to say about anything?  He's basically the poster child for the Islamist-apologist takeover of all major academic departments related to Middle East studies.

 

https://www.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/juan-cole/muhammad/9781568587837/

 

"In the midst of the dramatic seventh-century war between two empires, Muhammad was a spiritual seeker in search of community and sanctuary."

 

Basically, Juan Cole would take the Palestinian side even if they obtained rogue nuclear weapons and wiped Israel off the map.  The world would do a stop-motion double-take on its axis if he ever said a single good thing about Israel.  He's comfortably ensconced in his tenure at UM and will spend the rest of his career there castigating Israel and enjoying the benefits of having chosen a civilized target that doesn't treat its detractors like Salman Rushdie or Ayaan Hirsi Ali ... unlike the religion he favors with the political cover of his activism-academia.

 

The proposition being made was that Israel's occupation of the Golan Heights may strengthen Russian and Iranian influence in the Middle East.

 

Your position that the person making that statement is someone you dislike (a Jewish scholar of Middle East studies who wrote a book about Islam that is not anti-Islam) is not a valid reason to discount the proposition.  Rather, if an ad hominem attack is your best argument that tends to reinforce rather than discount the proposition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Israel's now-recognized legitimate ownership of the Golan Heights is not exactly a win for Russian interests in the Middle East.  The country that had a historic claim to ownership of them (by dint of having it arbitrarily carved up by the French and British), Syria, is the beneficiary of Russian and Iranian influence.  You have to be a wild mental contortionist (which Cole is, and the fact that pointing out that a biased source is biased emphatically does not "reinforce rather than discount the proposition" that the biased source is somehow telling the truth) to argue that a defeat for Syria strengthens Russia and Iran.

 

Since apparently biased sources can't be attacked as biased anymore, allow me to answer with the words of one of the leading neoconservatives:

 

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/03/golan-heights-israel-recognition-good-move/

 

Good Move on the Golan Heights

By DOUGLAS J. FEITH

 

When Syria someday, with new leadership, seeks to reestablish official relations with the United States, it will now have to do so on the understanding that Israeli retention of the Golan is a closed issue. Syria’s new leadership would not then be asked to humiliate itself by ceding the territory but only to recognize that President Assad lost it permanently as one of the many consequences of the civil war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Golan Heights are Syrian territory by international law.  Just because Israel is an ally does not justify their occupation of and unilateral annexation of the area.

 

You cannot simultaneously claim to support democracy around the world and recognize Israel's occupation of foreign lands in violation of international law. 


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone explain this to me- if the international community views the Golan Heights as not being under Israel's control, would the US recognizing it as such mean anything to the rest of the world, if the rest of the world viewed it as the opposite?

 

Would the rest of the world would be saying, "So what"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, eastvillagedon said:

Additionally there has never been a nation of Palestine.

 

Quote

The State of Palestine is recognized by 136 UN members and since 2012 has a status of a non-member observer state in the United Nations – which implies recognition of statehood.

 


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, DarkandStormy said:

 

 

but modern day Israel was formed in 1948 (leaving aside the obvious fact that Jews have a historical claim to this land going back thousands of years), so it would appear that a "nation" of people recognized in only 2012 would be attempting to displace the original inhabitants, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Oldmanladyluck said:

Can someone explain this to me- if the international community views the Golan Heights as not being under Israel's control, would the US recognizing it as such mean anything to the rest of the world, if the rest of the world viewed it as the opposite?

 

Would the rest of the world would be saying, "So what"?

 

At this level, honestly, no.  There are not major international institutional prizes at stake like when the recognized government of China changed from Taiwan to the mainland.  (Crazy as it sounds now, Taiwan had a seat on the UN Security Council for a time because we didn't recognize the change of control of the government of the mainland; the island government was considered the legitimate government-in-exile and we vetoed any attempt to seat mainland Communist China in its place.)

 

The Golan Heights have a total population of about 100,000 people and are about half the size of Long Island.  If it were the Golan Valley instead, it probably wouldn't even be as much of a deal because it's a strategic position the Syrians used to shoot rockets into Israel before they lost it.  That said, it controls access to the Sea of Galilee, which is a strategically vital fresh water source for Israel.  With control of the Golan, the sea is 100% within Israeli borders and cannot be easily drained via pipe or simply contaminated by a hostile power.

 

My earlier heat was just because shadowboxing arguments with academics on the Internet are of course genuinely important, not because the Golan Heights actually have major geopolitical significance except as a flashpoint for potentially larger conflicts.

 

i suppose it could matter to the rest of the world if anyone wanted to, say, build an international airport there (i.e., who do you get air travel rights from, whose customs do you go through, etc.).  Doubt that's in the cards anytime soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gramarye said:

Israel's now-recognized legitimate ownership of the Golan Heights is not exactly a win for Russian interests in the Middle East.  The country that had a historic claim to ownership of them (by dint of having it arbitrarily carved up by the French and British), Syria, is the beneficiary of Russian and Iranian influence.  You have to be a wild mental contortionist (which Cole is, and the fact that pointing out that a biased source is biased emphatically does not "reinforce rather than discount the proposition" that the biased source is somehow telling the truth) to argue that a defeat for Syria strengthens Russia and Iran.

 

Since apparently biased sources can't be attacked as biased anymore, allow me to answer with the words of one of the leading neoconservatives:

 

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/03/golan-heights-israel-recognition-good-move/

 

Good Move on the Golan Heights

By DOUGLAS J. FEITH

 

When Syria someday, with new leadership, seeks to reestablish official relations with the United States, it will now have to do so on the understanding that Israeli retention of the Golan is a closed issue. Syria’s new leadership would not then be asked to humiliate itself by ceding the territory but only to recognize that President Assad lost it permanently as one of the many consequences of the civil war.

1

 

Many of the currently-recognized "nations" had their boundaries drawn by former world powers rather than the people who live there.  Israel is not an exception to that rule. 

(Absent the international agreement to designate Israel's borders and essentially give the land to the Jewish people, their historical claims are no better than American Indians' claims to land in the U.S.  I understand that many people would disagree on that point.)

 

International law (the Geneva Conventions, signed by a majority of the nations of the world, including the U.S.) said that countries could not acquire territory through military conquest.  The international community thought that creating this rule would limit military aggression, and this was the state of international law when Israel conquered the Golan Heights militarily, in contravention of this international agreement to the contrary.  For the US to reneg on the treaty suggests that no treaty any country signs with the US is only as good for as long as the US decides to honor it.  I would argue that that is a terrible way to run a business or to provide any kind of leadership.  Nations are going to be a lot less likely to agree to follow the US going forward. 

 

Yes, go ahead and point out biases, but explain how that bias distorted the analysis.  

 

Juan Cole says, and I would agree, that the US backing Israel's ownership of the militarily-conquered Golan Heights strengthens Russia's claim that its military conquest of Crimea and claim to Crimea was justified.  Why do you think that this opinion is wrong, and how does a pro-Palestinian bias change the analysis?

 

Juan Cole says, and I would agree, that the US backing Israel's violation of international accords strengthens Iran, because when Iran supports the return of the Golan Heights to Syria, Iran is taking the side of international law.  This gives Iran the opportunity to be seen as supporting the rule of law and will give legitimacy to Iran in the eyes of Syrians and other Middle East countries who also may be vulnerable to further Israeli military action to grab more territory.   Why do you think that this is incorrect and how does Professor Cole's pro-Palestinian bias make him mis-characterize this situation?

 

I note that you did not highlight the biases of Douglas Feith or the National Review.  Mr. Feith has been an advisor to Benjamin Netanyahu and a contributor to Raphael Israeli's The Dangers of a Palestinian State.  He also was Undersecretary of Defense under George W. Bush and was accused of helping to "spin" the intelligence about al-Qaeda in Iraq to justify that war.  And the National Review is proudly conservative.

 

The article does not address any impact that this decision will have on international law, Russia, or Iranian influence in the region.  It does present a conservative view that Israel is always right.

Mr. Feith seems to argue that Syria is no longer a legitimate nation since they bombed their own people and "imposed" millions of refugees on other countries -- which is what the Israeli state has been doing with the non-Jewish people under its control.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW the Palestinian regime is fighting a two front battle. People in Gaza City have had active protests, some violent, against the regime for the last 4-5 weeks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I expressly highlighted Feith's biases.  That's what I meant by my quip about how we apparently can't call out biased sources anymore, so I went shamelessly to one of the most pro-Israel biased sources out there.  He's in some sense the anti-Juan Cole, about as pro-Israel as Cole is anti-Israel.  Beyond that, I'd be basically at Netanyahu himself.  Not in any way arguing that Feith is unbiased.

 

Israel won the Golan Heights in a defensive war against a regime that had been using the Golan Heights as a strategic position to launch rocket attacks into Israel even before 1967.  It is not comparable to the seizure of Crimea by Russia.  On a more realist note, Russia also doesn't care about the strength of our soft-power hand.  They will not give Crimea back voluntarily.  Only a successful popular revolt or an internal collapse in Russia itself, e.g., what brought down the Soviet Union and made it impossible for it to keep hold of its less willing periphery, will dislodge Crimea from the Russian orbit at this point.

 

Iran can try to play the noble crusader supporting international law if it so chooses.  It will be laughed out of any sane audience if it tries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gramarye said:

Israel won the Golan Heights in a defensive war against a regime that had been using the Golan Heights as a strategic position to launch rocket attacks into Israel even before 1967.  It is not comparable to the seizure of Crimea by Russia.  On a more realist note, Russia also doesn't care about the strength of our soft-power hand.  They will not give Crimea back voluntarily.  Only a successful popular revolt or an internal collapse in Russia itself, e.g., what brought down the Soviet Union and made it impossible for it to keep hold of its less willing periphery, will dislodge Crimea from the Russian orbit at this point.

 

Iran can try to play the noble crusader supporting international law if it so chooses.  It will be laughed out of any sane audience if it tries.

 

There have been some claims that Israel shelled the Golan first, which prompted Syria to respond and gave Israel the pretext to push Syria back and take the Golan Heights, it's water and fertile fields, for its own.  But it doesn't matter -- if Syria was shelling Isreal, that was in violation of international law and international observers could have been called upon.  Israel's annexation of Syria's territory also was in violation of international law -- if might makes right, then the world will be far bloodier and Bush II and Trump are moving us in that direction.

 

I agree that Russia will not give Crimea back voluntarily, and is highly unlikely to do so any time in the foreseeable future, if ever.  But calls for Russia to do so under international law will continue to be an irritant, and some countries can make things difficult for Russian businesses operating outside of Russia over the issue.  So to have a another security council power like the U.S. approve of Israel's annexation of another country's territory will help Russia.  The effect may be minor, but it sets a precedent.  Maybe Russia wants to regain more of Ukraine... or maybe China wants a Japanese island or two -- or decides to reclaim Taiwan.  Or North Korea decides to take over some islands that the South claims (Trump does love his buddy Kim).  The US appears to have signaled its approval with no clear signal of where we'd draw the line.

 

I maintain that it weakens the US on the world stage to not only ignore international law but to actively say that the US is going to ignore it, as we have done with the Golan Heights.  What if the world goes further in isolating the US -- adopt the Euro for world oil prices, ignore US banking regulations, set up trade regimes and exclude the US, exclude the US from international standards negotiations, etc.   The repercussions could be more extensive over time if we continue to act like the rules don't apply to us.

 

As awful as Iran's government has been for its people at times, they're not really any worse than our buddies in Saudi Arabia.  Iran may yet get the last laugh.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be very, very easy to draw an alt-history timeline in which the US and Saudi Arabia were enemies every bit on the scale of Iran.  No argument there.  And yet not only are we somehow ostensible friends with them (despite some of the unforgivable things they do their own people, and even American women who move there after marrying Saudi men unappreciative of the danger), somehow they have an open-secret relationship with Israel that's about as stridently denied and widely known as the Israeli nuclear weapons program.  15 of the 19 hijackers on 9/11 were Saudis.  You won't find me defending Saudi Arabia or our relationship with it as a good thing.  From a Realpolitik sense, it might be an understandable thing, but sometimes I struggle even with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's another interesting article about the history around the 1967 war -- not from Juan Cole at M!chigan -- but citing international law scholar John Quigley at Ohio State.

https://mondoweiss.net/2014/06/understanding-still-matters/

Quote

In 1968, Yitzhak Rabin gave an interview to Eric Rouleau at Le Monde, stating: “I do not believe that Nasser wanted war…. The two divisions he sent into Sinai on May 14 would not have been enough to unleash an offensive against Israel.  He knew it and we knew it.”

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's not the first historical revisionist trying to revise history to delegitimize Israel and he won't be the last.  Either way, I don't think he needs to worry too much about the threat from international law based on false facts even if those bullet points in the Mondoweiss article turn out to be accurate reflections of on-the-ground realities and not merely cherry-picked comments out of context.  I would obviously be interested in reading the counterargument, which of course one would never get from Mondoweiss; they have their axe to grind and they will grind it until Israel is dust.  But even if true, what he says about the narrative of the Six Day War being the foundational case for defensive preemptive war would remain based on the accepted narrative of the Six Day War, not the revisionist one.  In other words, the law of preemptive war has not been expanded, because it is based on assumed facts that the three countries arrayed against Israel were an active and imminent threat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^If the civilized world treated Israel with the same reasonable degree of criticism it does other nations then yes, not everything would have to be filtered through a lens of anti-Semitism, real or imagined, but that world doesn't exist, since even the slightest misstep by Israel is treated like the worst human rights violated ever perpetrated. Israel is held to a much higher standard than any other country. You have to wonder why that is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...