Is Israel Too Strong for America?

[Josquius]

That stuff about the Japanese in the 30s with the Jews is indeed funny.
Just goes to show that though they were modern in some ways in others they really were just 80 years from medieval.

[Malthus]

That stuff about the Japanese in the 30s with the Jews is indeed funny.
Just goes to show that though they were modern in some ways in others they really were just 80 years from medieval.

... as, apparently, was most of Europe, as the '30s and '40s was to prove. 

Anyway, this part is just plain odd:

The end of 20th, many books about "Plot of Jews" or "The theory that Japanese and Jews have common ancestry" were sold.

Huh? 

[Queequeg]

It doesn't
The next question: does it get accomplished even if the Likud coaliation temporarily halts the settlements?

I think it would make our relationship with the Arab World far easier.

Secondly, I suspect that a reasonably functional West Bank Arab got. would help, at least, calm things down for a bit and allow for the Arab world to set itself on a path towards development. 

Thirdly, even if the Likud coalition halts the growth of settlements and nothing is accomplished, I don't see this as a bad thing.  The settlements are a bad thing.  We are not debating whether or not Israel should quit doing something positive so that the West Bank can develop; we are arguing that Israel should attempt to abandon West-Bank settlements because it flies in the face of Palestinian national sovereignty, the development of which is the only realistic solution to this problem.

[The Minsky Moment]

The question is what is in the US national interest.

Making settlements in the West may be bad policy (for Israel) and may be an obstacle to resolution of the Palestinian Question in a manner conducive to US interests.  But remove that obstacle, and nothing is going to change with the present state of affairs.  This Israeli government is not going to be able to reach any meaningful resolution with any conceivable set of Palestinian counterparties that can actually get a deal done.

So from the POV of US national interests, Israeli settlement policy doesn't really matter much right now.

[Malthus]

It doesn't
The next question: does it get accomplished even if the Likud coaliation temporarily halts the settlements?

I think it would make our relationship with the Arab World far easier.

Secondly, I suspect that a reasonably functional West Bank Arab got. would help, at least, calm things down for a bit and allow for the Arab world to set itself on a path towards development. 

Thirdly, even if the Likud coalition halts the growth of settlements and nothing is accomplished, I don't see this as a bad thing.  The settlements are a bad thing.  We are not debating whether or not Israel should quit doing something positive so that the West Bank can develop; we are arguing that Israel should attempt to abandon West-Bank settlements because it flies in the face of Palestinian national sovereignty, the development of which is the only realistic solution to this problem.

The Israeli extremists are clearly of the opinion that a comprehensive peace with the Arabs is not possible at this time, if at all - that lack of concessions they will take as "provocation" and presense of concessions they will take as "weakness". So they intend it would seem to simply grab the real estate they want and built a wall around it.

The problem for the rest of us is to find something that will disabuse them of this notion. The events in Gaza were particularly unfortunate in that respect - the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza isn't a good precident for further Israeli withdrawals, or the notion that Israeli concessions are a good starting-point for peace in the region.

[Admiral Yi]

I think it would make our relationship with the Arab World far easier.

This argument would be stronger if there were actual examples of the US working on behalf of Palestinian/Arab interests being rewarded with good will.  I can think of only one: Kuwait.  The US's actions in Suez didn't create any discernable good will.  The US's (very limited) actions in Oslo didn't create any discernable good will.

Thirdly, even if the Likud coalition halts the growth of settlements and nothing is accomplished, I don't see this as a bad thing.  The settlements are a bad thing.  We are not debating whether or not Israel should quit doing something positive so that the West Bank can develop; we are arguing that Israel should attempt to abandon West-Bank settlements because it flies in the face of Palestinian national sovereignty, the development of which is the only realistic solution to this problem.

Which is it Squeelus?  Are you opposed to settlements because you find them morally reprehensible and outcomes are not important, or because freezing settlements will lead to (or at least increase the odds of) a lasting peace?

[Hansmeister]

Fuck the nazi death cult palestinians.  If there is any group of people less deserving of a state i can't think of it.

If the palestinians want the West Bank, they first need to end their genocidal mania.  Israelis are far too soft on the palestinians, they should engage in contiuous carpet bombing until resistance is broken.

[Barrister]

Fuck the nazi death cult palestinians.  If there is any group of people less deserving of a state i can't think of it.

Confedertards.

[Ed Anger]

Fuck the nazi death cult palestinians.  If there is any group of people less deserving of a state i can't think of it.

Confedertards.

Whoever Spellus has a crush on this week.

[Neil]

Fuck the nazi death cult palestinians.  If there is any group of people less deserving of a state i can't think of it.

Confedertards.

Africans.  Chinese.

[Queequeg]

Fuck the nazi death cult palestinians.  If there is any group of people less deserving of a state i can't think of it.

If the palestinians want the West Bank, they first need to end their genocidal mania.  Israelis are far too soft on the palestinians, they should engage in contiuous carpet bombing until resistance is broken.

Stop a genocidal death cult by committing genocide.  Brilliant.

Which is it Squeelus?  Are you opposed to settlements because you find them morally reprehensible and outcomes are not important, or because freezing settlements will lead to (or at least increase the odds of) a lasting peace?

I fail to see how these two are mutually exclusive, though I think the outcome of the eventual Israeli pull out of the West Bank will, ultimately, be positive.  Gaza was a freak case, and I think allowing a vote in Palestine was stupid anyway.

So from the POV of US national interests, Israeli settlement policy doesn't really matter much right now.

Having a unilateral Israeli freezing of settlement growth and construction, and eventual pulling out, would nicely coincide with the Cairo speech and help improve our image in the ME.  However, this is fantasy, and in retrospect you are largely right on this point.  We need a Likud PM with the foresight to realize that pulling out of the West Bank is in Palestine's interest, as the Israeli left is moribund and would never be able to do it anyway.

[Neil]

Stop a genocidal death cult by committing genocide.  Brilliant.

Interesting fact:  It's the only solution that has ever been successful.  Assuming that you believe that carpet bombing civilians is genocide, in which case, you're wrong.

[Hansmeister]

I have to laugh at PS' delusion that a settlement freeze would do anything to change public opinion in the ME.  Talk about clueless. 

[Razgovory]

You are confusing means with ends.

I don't see how Middle-East stabilization (let alone peace) is accomplished while Likud and their far-right buddies are colonizing the West Bank.  One should be a part of the other.

Is the stabilization of the Middle East in the US national interest?

You know, probably not.

[Queequeg]

I have to laugh at PS' delusion that a settlement freeze would do anything to change public opinion in the ME.  Talk about clueless. 

In the long term?  I think it will help.  You're an idiot if you think that Israel hasn't contributed to the current fucked up situation, or if you think that we gain anything from the Israeli Far Right dominating the country and exploiting the West Bank.

Oh wait, you're not an idiot, you're just a troll.

Assuming that you believe that carpet bombing civilians is genocide, in which case, you're wrong.

Continued terror bombing until they all just give up? Firstly, I don't think it has ever really happened, as both Shanghai and Warsaw ended up being a pain after their respective terror bombings.  Secondly, it just kills people, and most of the people in Palestine are kids.  I don't know why anyone would ever want to bomb thousands/millions of kids to death.