Israel in American politics

[objectiveMan]

This is an issue which I have not understood as an outsider to US politics. Why does Israel get such a special treatment in American politics? Why do all the politicians always say in debates and interviews how much they support Israel? Their attitude is often so strong, that it feels like they care about Israel even more than USA. Usually the politicians justify this by just saying "Israel is our ally", but US has many allies. I've never heard this said about South Korea.

I know Israel has a powerful lobby, and I understand that to be part of the reason. I also know Israel is important for religion, so I guess that has something to do with it. Maybe some guilt over what happened to jews in WW2? Help me out guys, I can't figure it out. To me it's just another country like the rest of them.

[Wolf DeVoon]

"Third rail" (the electrified one, touch it and die). Sad to say, Americans broadly accept the notion of a holy land.

Right, Bob? Greg?

[anthony]

This is an issue which I have not understood as an outsider to US politics. Why does Israel get such a special treatment in American politics? Why do all the politicians always say in debates and interviews how much they support Israel? Their attitude is often so strong, that it feels like they care about Israel even more than USA. Usually the politicians justify this by just saying "Israel is our ally", but US has many allies. I've never heard this said about South Korea.

I know Israel has a powerful lobby, and I understand that to be part of the reason. I also know Israel is important for religion, so I guess that has something to do with it. Maybe some guilt over what happened to jews in WW2? Help me out guys, I can't figure it out. To me it's just another country like the rest of them.

As another outsider, I'd think the 'Holy Land' and the Jewish lobby are part of it, but not all. I think traditionally the American "rugged individualist" related to another people who sought, fought for and built their own destiny and independence. The present Left (and many libertarians, strangely) are questioning the special relationship.

What may also count is there has been one consistently rule of law democracy in the ME, and Israel is it.

[Wolf DeVoon]

consistently rule of law nation in the ME.

without defined borders, occupying land in Syria, blockading Gaza, special privileges for Orthodox Jews

[anthony]

consistently rule of law nation in the ME.

without defined borders, occupying land in Syria, blockading Gaza, special privileges for Orthodox Jews

You must know that Gaza was taken from Egyptian control in the '67 defensive war and occupied by Israel? As it won the whole Sinai (but later gave it back to Egypt in return for a peace treaty)?

Then,

"Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza in 2005". [wikipedia]

That is when trouble started since a terror gang Hamas took over by ballot and force, murdering many moderate opponents and declaring it their mission to wipe out Israel. After many armed infiltrations and thousands of rocket attacks, thus the blockade by land and sea. Instead of taking the opportunity to be an independent, booming nation-state, that's the choice it made.

Syria, Israel's once greatest enemy, also lost the Golan Heights in the same 6 Day war. Strategically the Heights control Syria's access to northern Israel which sensibly annexed it in 1981.

So you might see the pickle Israel is in with the other territory, the West Bank. 1. If they pull out, in all likelihood the PLO, Fatah, Hamas and any Islamist groups will launch attacks from there, a la Gaza. 2. The PLO have been making a pretence at wanting peace, fooling the sentimental media and gullible Western negotiators for decades: categorically, they are the last to want peace and a fair Two State Solution, they believe they can take over all of Israel one day by demographics, European/UN support - and continuous force. Israel is the only side that badly wants peace, as any successful economy and self-interested people would, in which (presently unlikely) case the borders of both states would be defined, obviously.

Hard to discuss this if you don't know the facts.

The demanding Orthodox Jews are a constant problem, as are the complex and large number of parties in the Knesset, from the Israeli-Arab one, to the Left, to the ultra religious. But which democratic country's perfect?

[Wolf DeVoon]

Hard to discuss this if you don't know the facts.

I agree completely. Harry Truman created Israel to win election and despised himself for doing it.

see https://books.google.com/books?id=DyWK9rIImB4C&pg=PA112&lpg=PA112&dq=jewish+vote+1948+election&source=bl&ots=QcbROxwSaL&sig=PCOv-CM-7wMl1L__DrDNy-TRz1w&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAjgKahUKEwic2N7C6sXIAhURoogKHdVODBU#v=onepage&q=jewish%20vote%201948%20election&f=false

and http://www.newrepublic.com/article/116215/was-harry-truman-zionist

[RobinReborn]

In part because Israel has provided the USA with useful intelligence, the destalinization speech of Khrushchev was given to the USA by the Mossad. Israel has more in common with the USA than any other nation in the middle east.

[Selene]

In part because Israel has provided the USA with useful intelligence, the destalinization speech of Khrushchev was given to the USA by the Mossad. Israel has more in common with the USA than any other nation in the middle east.

Any source for your statement above?

[Wolf DeVoon]

In part because Israel has provided the USA with useful intelligence...

Any source for your statement above?

Of course.

"None of the Israelis who came were cleared into the Pentagon through normal channels," said one source familiar with the visits. Instead, they were waved in on Mr Feith's authority without having to fill in the usual forms. The exchange of information continued a long-standing relationship Mr Feith and other Washington neo-conservatives had with Israel's Likud party.

In 1996, he and Richard Perle - now an influential Pentagon figure - served as advisers to the then Likud leader, Binyamin Netanyahu. In a policy paper they wrote, entitled A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm, the two advisers said that Saddam would have to be destroyed, and Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Iran would have to be overthrown or destabilised, for Israel to be truly safe.

The Israeli influence was revealed most clearly by a story floated by unnamed senior US officials in the American press, suggesting the reason that no banned weapons had been found in Iraq was that they had been smuggled into Syria. Intelligence sources say that the story came from the office of the Israeli prime minister.

The OSP absorbed this heady brew of raw intelligence, rumour and plain disinformation and made it a "product", a prodigious stream of reports with a guaranteed readership in the White House. The primary customers were Mr Cheney, Mr Libby and their closest ideological ally on the national security council, Stephen Hadley, Condoleezza Rice's deputy. In turn, they leaked some of the claims to the press, and used others as a stick with which to beat the CIA and the state department analysts, demanding they investigate the OSP leads.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/jul/17/iraq.usa

Israeli leaders from across the political spectrum became cheerleaders for the invasion, and they played a prominent role in helping to sell the war here in the United States. Benjamin Netanyahu visited Washington, DC in April 2002 and spoke in the U.S. Senate, telling his audience "the urgent need to topple Saddam is paramount," and that the campaign "deserves the unconditional support of all sane governments." (It sure sounds like he was well aware of the discussions in Crawford, doesn’t it?) In May, foreign minister Shimon Peres said on CNN that "Saddam Hussein is as dangerous as bin Laden," and that the United States "cannot sit and wait." A month later, former Prime Minister Ehud Barak wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post recommending that the Bush administration "should, first of all, focus on Iraq and the removal of Saddam Hussein." This chorus continued through the summer and fall, with Barak and Netanyahu writing additional op-eds in the New York Times and Wall Street Journal, each calling for military action to topple Saddam. Netanyahu’s piece was titled "The Case for Toppling Saddam" and said that "nothing less than dismantling his regime will do." Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s official spokesman, Ra’anan Gissen, offered similar statements during this period as well, and Sharon himself told the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee in August 2002 that Iraq was "the greatest danger facing Israel." According to an Aug. 16 article by Aluf Benn in Ha’aretz, Sharon reportedly told the Bush administration that putting off an attack would "only give [saddam] more of an opportunity to accelerate his program of WMD." Foreign Minister Peres reiterated his own warnings as well, and told reporters in September 2002 that "the campaign against Saddam Hussein is a must."

http://foreignpolicy.com/2010/02/08/i-dont-mean-to-say-i-told-you-so-but/

[Selene]

Wolf:

I was specifically asking RR about the the de-Stalinization speech of Khrushchev.

The items you refer to I am aware of.

A...

[Brant Gaede]

The US plus Israel means war sooner than later. Whether that's good or bad is a question. The US less Israel means an impossibility. The only major existential threat to Israel in today's world is nuclear weapons. No country feels that heat more than Israel. It lives next door to war and is always ready for it. The US uses Israel as either a flash point illustrating danger of war or as a whipping boy because Americans are on line to replace the Jews for destruction--but first, the Jews. Having a "Great Satan" is of enormous value to the religious-political and military leaders of Iran. The existence of Israel itself is a consequence of religious-political-emotional collectivist insanity--but there it is.

The US (and the world) plus oil means war . . .

--Brant

then there's Russia--and what?--pick and choose; who knows what the next Pres will do, especially out of ignorance and stupidity and on the job training

Oh: China, oh brother

[objectiveMan]

Some good insight here for sure, but I don't feel much closer to a clear cut answer. I guess there isn't one.

[Brant Gaede]

The further north the culture gets the less the concern with the Jews.

--Brant

ask the Eskimos about them

[Selene]

This is an issue which I have not understood as an outsider to US politics. Why does Israel get such a special treatment in American politics? Why do all the politicians always say in debates and interviews how much they support Israel? Their attitude is often so strong, that it feels like they care about Israel even more than USA. Usually the politicians justify this by just saying "Israel is our ally", but US has many allies. I've never heard this said about South Korea.

I know Israel has a powerful lobby, and I understand that to be part of the reason. I also know Israel is important for religion, so I guess that has something to do with it. Maybe some guilt over what happened to jews in WW2? Help me out guys, I can't figure it out. To me it's just another country like the rest of them.

Pekka:

Is Finland's school system organized similar to Sweden?

A...

[objectiveMan]

Is Finland's school system organized similar to Sweden?

As far as I know, yes. All the Scandinavian countries are very similar to each other in most aspects.

[Selene]

Is Finland's school system organized similar to Sweden?

As far as I know, yes. All the Scandinavian countries are very similar to each other in most aspects.

I thought so, thanks.

How was WWII and the "Jewish question" treated.

A...

[objectiveMan]

How was WWII and the "Jewish question" treated.

I don't actually know what exactly you mean by the "Jewish question". If you mean WW2 and the holocaust in general, I don't think there was a particularly strong emphasis on it in our history lessons, but it is hard to recall so far back. Probably the usual line that is taught in western countries in general. Of course, we were allied with Germany in WW2. The emphasis of WW2 history lessons was more of what happened to our country.

[Selene]

How was WWII and the "Jewish question" treated.

I don't actually know what exactly you mean by the "Jewish question". If you mean WW2 and the holocaust in general, I don't think there was a particularly strong emphasis on it in our history lessons, but it is hard to recall so far back. Probably the usual line that is taught in western countries in general. Of course, we were allied with Germany in WW2. The emphasis of WW2 history lessons was more of what happened to our country.

Interesting.

The Finn resistance forces were legendary.

Also, you had to cede about 10% to the different mass murderer Stalin.

Well, at least you did not have a Quisling.

A...

[Selene]

There are some great photos in this article...I want a few of these for the coming ice age...

http://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2013/05/finland-in-world-war-ii/100519/

[Backlighting]

http://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2013/05/finland-in-world-war-ii/100519/

Stunning photos. Thanks Adam.

[Selene]

http://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2013/05/finland-in-world-war-ii/100519/

Stunning photos. Thanks Adam.

Yes, looking at them now ... this one I would name the War of Art ---- what a powerful photo...

[objectiveMan]

Beautiful photos indeed. Those men look tough in the freezing cold winter.

[Selene]

The US plus Israel means war sooner than later. Whether that's good or bad is a question. The US less Israel means an impossibility. The only major existential threat to Israel in today's world is nuclear weapons. No country feels that heat more than Israel. It lives next door to war and is always ready for it. The US uses Israel as either a flash point illustrating danger of war or as a whipping boy because Americans are on line to replace the Jews for destruction--but first, the Jews. Having a "Great Satan" is of enormous value to the religious-political and military leaders of Iran. The existence of Israel itself is a consequence of religious-political-emotional collectivist insanity--but there it is.

The US (and the world) plus oil means war . . .

--Brant

then there's Russia--and what?--pick and choose; who knows what the next Pres will do, especially out of ignorance and stupidity and on the job training

Oh: China, oh brother

The O'bama administration's anti Israel, pro Iran posture seems confirmed by this stunning article in the Wall Street Journal:

It started off as a routine call between then-House Speaker John Boehner and the incoming Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, about ways Republicans in Congress could put the brakes on the nuclear pact President Barack Obama was negotiating with Iran.

Then Messrs. Boehner and McConnell had a light-bulb moment: They could undercut Mr. Obama by extending an invitation to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to deliver a speech to a joint session of Congress opposing the emerging deal.

The initiative set in motion by Messrs. Boehner and McConnell during the Jan. 8 phone call not only would inflame hostilities between the White House and Republicans in Congress but exacerbate the biggest breakdown in relations between U.S. and Israeli heads of state in decades, as detailed in this Wall Street Journal piece.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-spy-net-on-israel-snares-congress-1451425210

[Brant Gaede]

The more such breakdown the less the US can control Israel. I can't say that would be good or bad.

--Brant

[Selene]

The more such breakdown the less the US can control Israel. I can't say that would be good or bad.

--Brant

Agreed, the point I would like to place in the meme stream is that:

1) we now are sure that this President "allowed," wink wink nod nod, NSA data to be used to influence negotiations with Iran;

2) does anyone have any doubt that he would not use them on Roberts, Clinton, etc.

A...