For the First Time I Am in Despair for the West, as Well as Israel

[jbg]

I am writing in response to some of themes in the thread about the Hamas-Israel cease fire (link). I will post separately there. This thread is directed to my fears for the West, overall. It appears that the West values "peace at any price."

The victorious powers, towards the end of WW II, created the U.N. in order to ensure that the horrors of WW I and WW II were never repeated. The theory was that "nation should not lift up sword against nation."

The problem is that peace-loving nations are fine with this concept, whereas aggressive ones ignore it. We saw early signs of this when the Soviet Union brutally overran Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, and East Germany (after earlier gobbling up Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia). To punctuate the point, when the people of Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968 decided they didn't enjoy Soviet-style "liberation" the Soviets crushed them with tanks. In 1981, with Poland, they were slightly more subtle. I suppose that their failure at bumping off the Pope made them fear for an Iranian style revolution in their back yard.

More recently, Muslim states have ignored the U.N. Charter. The U.N. didn't stop West Pakistan from butchering Bengali Muslims. And the bloodbaths in Syria, Yemen and Libya are either recent events or still in progress.

The U.N. spends time pillorying Israel for collateral damage. Meanwhile, Israel has just been forced into a truce that gives Gaza apparently unlimited ability to arm itself. Now, they will have modern weaponry and Israel's destruction is a matter of time.

Unless divine intervention saves Israel, I hope that the U.S., this time, accepts almost all fleeing Israelis. Given both WW II era and recent immigration policies, however, I see the U.S. as seeking more constituents for parties having a liberal voting record than people who are productive.

Israel's contributions to the world, whether in the form of hi-tech or involvement in rescues after tragedies matter little. The world has stopped valuing productivity and competence.

Even the U.N.'s allegedly non-political agencies are seeking to, and succeeding in binding the West in Lilliputian strings. Examples such as Kyoto,Copenhagen, Law of the Sea and restrictions on a free and robust Internet about. All of this to subsidize incompetent or corrupt kleptocrats.

The voting turnouts in the recent U.S. elections show that, basically, patriots didn't even bother to vote. Romney's vote total was lower than McCain's. The people who are voting are those who want a check.

The world seeks victims, not dynamos.

Edited November 24, 2012 by jbg

[DogOnPorch]

Unless Israel's military suddenly drops to bows and arrows, they really don't have much to fear conventionally as long as they focus on defense. Their toughest opponent is Egypt and even though it has some new American weapons, it still suffers from horrible Soviet-style command control. The immediate threat I'm seeing to Israel at the moment is the security around Syria's chemical weapons stockpiles which could very easily fall into the wrong hands. Some of that stuff is capable of rendering an area uninhabitable for centuries.

Iran, of course, is another factor. But there is perhaps some hope that the people will throw the fascists out of power. Their ICBM program is rather worrisome in the relative short-term, though. Iran is pushing forward an SRB program that will give all their MRBMs greater range and payload. I'm also not convinced that Iran doesn't ALREADY have some sort of device supplied from a third party.

[jbg]

Unless Israel's military suddenly drops to bows and arrows, they really don't have much to fear conventionally as long as they focus on defense.

Their toughest opponent is Egypt and even though it has some new American weapons, it still suffers from horrible Soviet-style command control.

No, their toughest opponent is Hamas. Iran is one step away from going nuclear and Hamas one more step. Together will turn the area into a tomb.

I pray I'm wrong but I think it's now over.

[eyeball]

The people who are voting are those who want a check.

The people who are not voting like you are in despair.

[eyeball]

The immediate threat I'm seeing to Israel at the moment is the security around Syria's chemical weapons stockpiles which could very easily fall into the wrong hands. Some of that stuff is capable of rendering an area uninhabitable for centuries.

I would have thought the threat of chemical weapons in the region would have been more obvious decades ago, back when it was being created.

[DogOnPorch]

No, their toughest opponent is Hamas. Iran is one step away from going nuclear and Hamas one more step. Together will turn the area into a tomb.

I pray I'm wrong but I think it's now over.

It is a worry and Morsi is a step away from leader for life...no big surprise there. But, the chemical weapons are a much more tangible threat. VX is nasty and both Syria and Iraq have had very active programs. As for nuclear weapons, not to make light of them, but whatever they can up with at first would be rather small in the yield department. Not something you'd want in the middle of Tel Aviv...but not Castle Bravo or the Tsar Bomb which is what would be needed to 'wipe out Israel'.

[DogOnPorch]

I would have thought the threat of chemical weapons in the region would have been more obvious decades ago, back when it was being created.

It was.

[WestViking]

What is truly despicable about the "truce" respecting fighting in Gaza is that (1) Gaza is not a nation. (2) Palestine, per se, is not a nation and does not exist except in the minds of some people, (3) Hamas is neither a nation or people; it is an outlaw terrorist group. How can a true nation such as Israel be required to negotiate with charlatans and terrorists?

I expect perfidy from Egypt, and nation that has openly attacked Israel in the past. However, I expect far better of the US State Department and Hillary Clinton. Recognition of and negotiations with Hamas is a de facto bow to the totalitarian regime in Iran. The Ayatollahs have clearly won this round and the US is seen as both rudderless and weak, not just by Hamas and Iran, but by al Qaeda and all middle eastern Arab nations. The damage to US interests is likely catastrophic.

[eyeball]

It was.

Maybe. It seems believing it or taking it seriously however depended on who was pointing it out, and what was going on at the time.

Edited November 24, 2012 by eyeball

[DogOnPorch]

Maybe. It seems believing it or taking it seriously however depended on who was pointing it out, and what was going on at the time.

The Arab-Israeli wars were always a microcosm of the Cold War if it went hot. Various results in that desert forced the Soviet Union to rethink its options numerous times. Syria as it exists for the moment is a relic of those days. Egypt was, too, up until Morsi.

[DogOnPorch]

What is truly despicable about the "truce" respecting fighting in Gaza is that (1) Gaza is not a nation. (2) Palestine, per se, is not a nation and does not exist except in the minds of some people, (3) Hamas is neither a nation or people; it is an outlaw terrorist group. How can a true nation such as Israel be required to negotiate with charlatans and terrorists?

I expect perfidy from Egypt, and nation that has openly attacked Israel in the past. However, I expect far better of the US State Department and Hillary Clinton. Recognition of and negotiations with Hamas is a de facto bow to the totalitarian regime in Iran. The Ayatollahs have clearly won this round and the US is seen as both rudderless and weak, not just by Hamas and Iran, but by al Qaeda and all middle eastern Arab nations. The damage to US interests is likely catastrophic.

You got that right, WV. Agreement.

[jbg]

What is truly despicable about the "truce" respecting fighting in Gaza is that (1) Gaza is not a nation. (2) Palestine, per se, is not a nation and does not exist except in the minds of some people, (3) Hamas is neither a nation or people; it is an outlaw terrorist group. How can a true nation such as Israel be required to negotiate with charlatans and terrorists?

Only in the fantasy land created by and then espoused by the chattering classes.

I expect perfidy from Egypt, and nation that has openly attacked Israel in the past.

No question about it. Nasser, then Sadat (in starting the 1973 war), and now Morsi has made it an art form. Mubarak was too busy enriching himself to bother with that form of perfidy.

However, I expect far better of the US State Department and Hillary Clinton.

I didn't.

The U.S. State Department has, since George Washington's days made stabbing its own country in the back an art form.

Recognition of and negotiations with Hamas is a de facto bow to the totalitarian regime in Iran. The Ayatollahs have clearly won this round and the US is seen as both rudderless and weak, not just by Hamas and Iran, but by al Qaeda and all middle eastern Arab nations. The damage to US interests is likely catastrophic.

The U.S. and the West has been actively committing suicide since the start of the Cold War, with a brief reprieve during the 1980's. As I pointed out in the opening post, the enemies of the West have never been constrained by the U.N.'s dubious "legal structure." The barbarians kill; the U.S. and the West push paper.

[DogOnPorch]

Project Daniel was the old think-tank on this matter...

http://www.acpr.org.il/ENGLISH-NATIV/03-ISSUE/daniel-3.htm

[WIP]

The victorious powers, towards the end of WW II, created the U.N. in order to ensure that the horrors of WW I and WW II were never repeated. The theory was that "nation should not lift up sword against nation."

The problem is that peace-loving nations are fine with this concept

I'll cut in here before you get to the part about how the Muslim nations are the only ones who are not peace-loving. Before we get to the part about creating first - the League of Nations, and then the United Nations after WWII, what do you think were the underlying motivations behind those wars? And that will tell us a lot about the likelihood that peace can be maintained by world bodies like the UN, which have no armies to enforce international law, and are essentially toothless!

WWI especially, was a war looking for an excuse to get going....long before a lone assassin shot Archduke Ferdinand, and got the ball rolling. There was competition for colonies and the resources they contained, between the established major colonial powers - England and France, and Germany - the rising upstart, trying to make itself the new power in Europe. Up till the outbreak of WWI, England was driving itself into bankruptcy because of the quest to maintain its overwhelming advantage as the dominant naval power in the world, by trying to hold to a policy of building two destroyers or similar warships to every one built by the new German Navy. All of the major players in Europe had been building up for a conflict viewed as inevitable, and wanted to get it over with.

And my despair about the state of the World now comes partially from the suspicion that the same thing, or something very similar is occurring today. The world powers today don't have an official policy of colonialization, but the growing scarcity of many essential natural resources is making the system of economic colonization increasingly ruthless. Newly independent former colonies a half century ago, soon found themselves led by dictators installed by the U.S. or England, who took on World Bank and IMF loans...bankrupting their nations on vanity projects that benefited few outside the ruling circles. Over the years, many countries in Africa and South America have had to turn over effective control of their land and resources in the ground to foreign commercial interests. The noose has tightened even further on many, who have had IMF or World Bank - installed advisers put in charge of drafting government budgets and making spending and policy decisions.

And, the competition between the major economic powers is equally ruthless today. The U.S. and Russia have been making moves and counter-moves, in the competition for access to oil and gas reserves in Central Asian republics. Modern day regime changes, like in Iraq and Libya, appear to have more to do with whose oil companies control the exploration and development contracts in what are the only oil-producing nations in the world today that still have major reserves of conventional oil that have not been pumped out yet.

And, this little story that just popped up on Iran's PressTV website, informs us that China plans to increase oil imports from Iran by 20% in the coming year....sort of flies in the face of the U.S. led attempt to enforce an economic embargo on Iran. China is determined to rebound from their recession of the last year, but they can't do that without securing imports of necessary resource -- especially energy -- coal from Australia, and now, more oil from Iran.

We already know that Russia is on Iran's side in this latest buildup to war, but China has had little to say, likely because they may be an economic power, but don't have a gargantuan military like the U.S. in order to play games of gunboat diplomacy. Nevertheless, if China is letting it be known that they are going to continue to disregard the U.S. - led attempts to seal off trade with Iran, this sets the stage for where all of the major players are going to be when a shooting war starts. A war with Iran is not going to be a simple little bombing mission that's over and done with. It will be the next world war because the players have decided that there's not enough advantage in sharing remaining resources, so they want to play winner-take-all.

[Hudson Jones]

What is truly despicable about the "truce" respecting fighting in Gaza is that (1) Gaza is not a nation. (2) Palestine, per se, is not a nation and does not exist except in the minds of some people,

Only because Israel has done everything in its power to not allow it to be a nation. The Palestinians were living in that land before the European Jews arrived there and forced the locals to carve out a large piece of their land so the Jews could have a nation.

(3) Hamas is neither a nation or people; it is an outlaw terrorist group. How can a true nation such as Israel be required to negotiate with charlatans and terrorists?

Two former Israeli prime ministers were former leaders of Jewish terrorist groups, Irgun and Lehi. Hamas was elected by the Palestinians, so they should be dealt with. There is nothing you can do about it.

he damage to US interests is likely catastrophic.

That's code word for "damage to blood thirsty Zionist interests is catastrophic".

You will have to deal with Palestinians and their rights whether you accept it or not.

Edited November 24, 2012 by Hudson Jones

[bush_cheney2004]

Only because Israel has done everything in its power to allow it to be a nation. The Palestinians were living in that land before the European Jews arrived there and forced the locals to carve out a large piece of their land so the Jews could have a nation.

How is this any different than the Canadian or American experience?

Two former Israeli prime ministers were former leaders of Jewish terrorist groups, Irgun and Lehi. Hamas was elected by the Palestinians, so they should be dealt with. There is nothing you can do about it.

They are being "dealt with".

You will have to deal with Palestinians and their rights whether you accept it or not.

No problem....other groups within nation states have been far more successful with non-violent strategies. Maybe the Palestinians will figure this out.

Edited November 24, 2012 by bush_cheney2004

[Moonlight Graham]

The U.N. spends time pillorying Israel for collateral damage. Meanwhile, Israel has just been forced into a truce that gives Gaza apparently unlimited ability to arm itself. Now, they will have modern weaponry and Israel's destruction is a matter of time.

Israelis will remain in Israel and fight to defend it to the death. They have nukes. This means that Israelis are going nowhere, and if push ever comes to shove and a real immanent threat to the existence of the state is at hand, Israel will turn the entire region into radioactive glass before turning tail and running to a refuge that doesn't even exist. Israel would ignore US and UN pleas for peace and launch massive conventional bombing runs on Gaza if they ever suspected WMD's could be in their reach. So I think your fears are overblown and Israel ain't going anywhere.

The voting turnouts in the recent U.S. elections show that, basically, patriots didn't even bother to vote. Romney's vote total was lower than McCain's. The people who are voting are those who want a check.

So Obama voters aren't patriots and are welfare state bums? Right...

The world seeks victims, not dynamos.

Of course many Israelis/Zionists (and Palestinians/area Arabs) do not have a victim mentality at all!

[Hudson Jones]

How is this any different than the Canadian or American experience?

Oh. It's the comparison again.

Israel was born out of the United Nations. Israel is also signatory to the laws of United Nations. Israel will have to follow the rules and laws of the United Nations. Not by circumstances of colonialism and savagery from more than 3 centuries ago that you advocate.

They are being "dealt with".

That's right. Israel was finally pushed to agree to a truce with Hamas:

Ceasefire deal

• Israel to end all hostilities on Gaza Strip by sea, land and air, including incursions and the targeting of individuals
  
• All Palestinian factions in Gaza to stop all hostilities against Israel, including rocket and border attacks
  
• Within 24 hours of ceasefire, Gaza Strip crossings to be opened allowing free movement of people and goods
  

No problem....other groups within nation states have been far more successful with non-violent strategies. Maybe the Palestinians will figure this out.

As will the Israelis.

[bush_cheney2004]

Oh. It's the comparison again.

Yes...you grow weary of it...yet the historical comparison cannot be ignored.

Israel was born out of the United Nations. Israel is also signatory to the laws of United Nations. Israel will have to follow the rules and laws of the United Nations. Not by circumstances of colonialism and savagery from more than 3 centuries ago that you advocate.

No, not really. Israel was born of an independence and nation state declaration, regardless of the UN. And like other nations such as Canada and the United States, it chooses to comply with UN "laws" as suits its nation state interests.

[Hudson Jones]

Yes...you grow weary of it...yet the historical comparison cannot be ignored.

It's your ridiculous comparisons that grow weary. It's not easy to take someone who compares the world and its rules from 3 centuries ago to now.

No, not really. Israel was born of an independence and nation state declaration, regardless of the UN. And like other nations such as Canada and the United States, it chooses to comply with UN "laws" as suits its nation state interests.

No. The nation states allowed Israel to become an independent state. If it wasn't for Great Britain and eventually a vote at the United Nations, Israel would not have a status. It's something that you need to accept. Israel cannot continue with the status quo, which is delegitimizing the Palestinians' right to a state and human rights. The world doesn't have the stomach for it anymore.

[bush_cheney2004]

It's your ridiculous comparisons that grow weary. It's not easy to take someone who compares the world and its rules from 3 centuries ago to now.

Three centuries ago and yet Canada remains Crown and master of its own "PalestIndians", with unsettled land claims, unilateral control of resources, and a legacy of subjugation.

No. The nation states allowed Israel to become an independent state. If it wasn't for Great Britain and eventually a vote at the United Nations, Israel would not have a status. It's something that you need to accept. Israel cannot continue with the status quo, which is delegitimizing the Palestinians' right to a state and human rights. The world doesn't have the stomach for it anymore.

This is a common fallacy, as Israel proceeded with independence despite UN bickering and resolution rejection by Arab states. It is now one of the most powerful states in the region, and it will not be undone by human rights apologists for terrorism.

[Hudson Jones]

Three centuries ago and yet Canada remains Crown and master of its own "PalestIndians", with unsettled land claims, unilateral control of resources, and a legacy of subjugation.

The natives continue to live in Canada and have the same rights (plus more) than the colonists from 3 centuries ago. They have a freedom of movement and can live anywhere they please. Many of the Palestinians were forced out by the colonist and cannot return to their land. The Jewish colonists also have an immigration system that is different than Canada's. Anyone is able to immigrate to Canada, whereas the Israeli immigration law is racist. Palestinians who live in Israel cannot simply live anywhere in Israel. Palestinians living in the occupied territories are under occupation.

How is the comparison working out for you?

This is a common fallacy, as Israel proceeded with independence despite UN bickering and resolution rejection by Arab states.

How is it a fallacy when their acceptance and legal status as a state was voted in by the united nations? Without their vote, Israel would not be.

It is now one of the most powerful states in the region, and it will not be undone by human rights apologists for terrorism.

"Not be undone"? "Apologists for terrorism"? How dramatic are you? Have you been watching too many Christians for Zionism infomercials again?

I don't think anyone here is asking for Israel to be dismantled and removed. This is about Israel leaving the occupied territories and not getting in the way of a Palestinian state.

Edited November 24, 2012 by Hudson Jones

[DogOnPorch]

"Not be undone"? "Apologists for terrorism"? How dramatic are you? Have you been watching too many Christians for Zionism infomercials again?

[bush_cheney2004]

The natives continue to live in Canada and have the same rights (plus more) than the colonists from 3 centuries ago. They have a freedom of movement and can live anywhere they please....

..and yet, who controls their land and the resources ?

How is the comparison working out for you?

Working fine for me...and your treasured UN.

How is it a fallacy when their acceptance and legal status as a state was voted in by the united nations? Without their vote, Israel would not be.

Did Canada or the USA need a UN vote ?

"Not be undone"? "Apologists for terrorism"? How dramatic are you? Have you been watching too many Christians for Zionism infomercials again?

No, I have been reading your posts.

I don't think anyone here is asking for Israel to be dismantled and removed. This is about Israel leaving the occupied territories and not getting in the way of a Palestinian state.

But you just said the magic deed could be done with a simple "UN vote". Why has this not happened yet?

[Michael Hardner]

Don't despair, JBG. Negotiations and dialogue are better than the alternative. Many seem to have an idea as to how a negotiated settlement would look - the quicker that such a settlement arrives the better.