Schumer's speech

Wow. I really couldn't guess how the Senate Majority Leader's remarks went down in the American Jewish community. Or at least in the Liberal end. The Orthodox Right are pretty solidly GOP anyway so they probably hated it. But the bulk of American Jews aren't "frum". Most are secular in fact and are unaffiliated with any synagogue.

But many have friends, family, and friends of family in Israel. The Hamas attack struck home and hard. I don't think Netanyahu is very popular with this crowd and I know that settler Zionism is not popular either. Then again, these folks remind themselves, or get reminded by Israelis, that living here isn't like living in Israel and the latter is in a dangerous neighborhood so STFU, okay?

That argument is stiffened by the undeniable fact that the American Liberal Jewish population CAN move freely to Israel and so why haven't you? What, you think WE should bear all the risk of building up the Jewish State so YOU can be proud of it?

I think that the silence will be deafening.

Miserable.

 

One can dislike Netanyahu and still support Israel. As Schumer said. The best line of attack against Netanyahu from within Israel is his failure to prevent October 7. Outside of Jewish circles, I think, he is weakest when it comes to his alienating the Jewish state from the rest of the world due to some 31,000 deaths in Gaza. Personally my biggest fear is that this mess hurts Biden so much that it gets Trump elected. Which would likely destroy our democracy. This mess is the fault of Netanyahu. I hope that the Israeli people vote him out sooner rather than later.

 

I support Israel, but not blindly or without qualifications. I feel they've conducted an apartheid since their occupation of Gaza, the West Bank, and the Golan Heights. Now they've advanced things in Gaza to a genocide.

Conquered lands should be assimilated or made peace with. But Israel has done neither, choosing instead to occupy them with no end in sight. It is no surprise that Hamas arose and, in my opinion, thrived, because Netanyahu wanted it that way. Hamas was useful politically to him.

Israel cannot accept a one-state solution because they know, inevitably, Muslims and Christians will outnumber them someday. And they won't accept a two-state solution because that would mean giving up lands they've occupied. So, apartheid it is.

Yes, the Hamas attack was horrid with no redeeming value at all. But look past that and see the underlying conditions that led to it--as well as the imbalance of power between Gaza and Israel.

And I don't think wiping out the occupants of Gaza is a good strategy, necessary, or even warranted. These are the same Israelis who hunted down Eichmann, who hunted down the terrorists from the Munich Olympics, who sought and found Nazis all over the globe. I have to think they could disable Hamas without killing tens of thousands of residents of Gaza...unless that's the point.

 

Well, all true as far as it goes. Though Hamas has never been interested in making peace. But there's another issue. Netanyahu is in power because enough Israeli voters keep him in power.

The Kahane faction that is now part of the ruling coalition espouses a purely Jewish theocracy in the whole of Palestine. They disfavor starting wars to accomplish this goal but they state that, should any such war begin, that war should be used to destroy any Arab governments and if possible expel the non Jewish population in the process. That's the definition of genocide.

I'm deeply afraid I know who is calling the shots in Netanyahu's government.

 

Elections year theatrics. They need the Michigan state votes from going red.
Netanyahu is Israels PM until next elections.
Michigan state in my humble opinion is now the best success or example of Political jihad.

Lieberman slams ‘outrageous’ Schumer speech: ‘I can’t ever remember anything like it’

" (I-Conn.) slammed Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) for a speech he made earlier this week in which he called for new elections in Israel.

“For a U.S. Senator, let alone a majority leader, let alone the highest-ranking Jewish elected official in Washington, to tell Israelis that it’s time to get rid of [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu], that’s outrageous,” Lieberman said in a Sunday interview with radio host John Catsimatidis on “The Cats Roundtable” on WABC 770 AM."

 

No, Lerner, I don't think so, not this time. American Palestinian voters aren't going to vote for Trump regardless. At worst they won't vote at all and I think most will come home. The Arab communities haven't forgotten the Bush years. No, Schumer's speech means what it said. Netanyahu will ignore it at his peril.

Having said that, Netanyahu might not have any freedom to choose a different course. His personal freedom depends on remaining in office. He no longer has enough support to remain in power without doing whatever the Settler Zionist parties tell him to do.

 

Such is the way with tyrants. They don't get to enjoy a quiet retirement.

 

My understanding is that Bibi is very unpopular in Israel. He was responsible for the lackluster security that lead to 1200 Israeli deaths on October 7. I think Lieberman's statements are just political posturing. Bibi is making Israel a country that is losing respect around the world. Israel has been accused of genocide in the international court. Bibi needs to be put in jail for his crimes against Israel.

 

Bibi was democratically elected, it's up to voting in Likud party if they want another candidate to replace Bibi.
Israel governance experienced serious earthquake in the last year +.
But even if some compare it to ways of Tyron, Israel is Democracy, the elections are not rigged, and transparent.
There is a lot of critique of Netanyahu, and it's all been in the news and posts here.
There will be elections, and conclusions of investigations on what lead to disastrous Oct 7th attacks and the Hamas money transfers etc, policies.
Eventually there will be elections and people will vote the next government unless apocalyptic proportion events take place and things change for the worse, there are enemies
who work hard to destroy Israel. Egypt amassed serious military might, and in direct violation of treaty with Israel, had serious military forces in Sinai. Which includes underground tunnels and bridges to cross the canal.
But at this time, a wartime and Northern Israel is very close to even further escalation with Hezbollah.

US support for Israel is needed more than ever, like in 1973 so is now. Israel made many mistakes, one of them was thinking that times came where they can reduce the military and make a small smart fighting force, they realize the huge mistake.

Time will show.

 

But what is the United States to do? Cutting off aid and support to Israel is unthinkable but using our support to extract concessions depends on a credible threat to do exactly that.

 

Why is it unthinkable? And why is it a polar, all-or-nothing choice?

 

Israel in 1973, Yom Kipur war was in a hard situation, and desperately needed supplies.
It wasn't coming for some time. When the war broke out, Nixon and Kissinger wanted to make sure that Israel did not lose,
but they favored a low profile for the U.S. role, so as not to anger Arab countries that were already suspicious of U.S. policy.
Eventually, Nixon decided in favor of a large-scale U.S. airlift of supplies.
Arab nations were pressuring the Western world through an oil embargo. Washington and Moscow were actively resupplying the opposing sides—and inching dangerously close to war.
Major factor in policy that Russians and US negotiated for each side in the conflict was:
Israel’s initial battlefield defeats seemed so severe, that on October 9 Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir ordered Israeli nuclear strike planes and missiles to go on alert.

Interesting release of telcons:

 

Why unthinkable. Well, because that might be the end of the State of Israel altogether. The U.S. needs Israel as an ally in the region and there are strong political, cultural and familial connections between the Israeli population and ourselves. We would have a very hard time watching the jackels descend.

Why bi-polar. Because the current government will not change course so long as there's breath in the body. I don't claim to understand how the religious zionist leadership think but they are absolutely convinced that they are doing the Will of Heaven. Any support we give them will go to destroying Arab communities and seizing the land.

A close parallel attitude might be how the 19th century U.S. government destroyed the indigenous tribes in this country relentlessly and thoroughly for the same reason. But those tribes did not have the support of other countries nor were our activities covered on the internet. Also, we had the terrific advantage of smallpox to kill off 80% of the tribes with little effort or expenditure. I think it was Sheridan who said that but for smallpox the U.S. wouldn't have conqured North America.

 

Genocide is always horrible and always disgusting. Genocide persists because as the Nazis understood it solves "national problems".

 

I understand that there is support for Palestinian genocide in the Israeli right wing. That right wing makes up much of Netanyahu's supporting government. A two state solution is the only real long term solution to this mess. Unfortunately, Netanyahu has radicalized a couple of generations of Palestinians with 31,000 deaths in Gaza. That is going to make more terrorists and further push out the earliest that a two state solution can be achieved.

 

I wish I could blame Netanyahu for frustrating the two state scheme but every government Israel has had since 1968 has overtly or covertly supported the settlers and funded the settlements beyond the Green Line. There was never any hope of a two state solution because in truth neither side wants it or ever has.

 

One of the earliest official acts of the nascent Jewish State was to agree to the U.N.'s 1947 Partition Plan. The Arabs rejected it. They've been rejecting it ever since with war after war after unsuccessful war. The Jews accepted the idea only once then did all they could to keep it from happening.

 

The Arabs played their hand badly. If they had accepted the U.N. Plan, thus calling the Jews's bluff, they could have occupied their half of Mandatory Palestine under U.N. protection and established a viable State. I find this blind spot odd because in general Arab politicians and diplomats are more subtle and shrewd than are the Israelis. But they chose war and lost. That initial loss wasn't supposed to happen.

 

I think their choice was a religious one, they would never accept a Jewish state. According to their faith, Jews, Christina's or any other non-Muslim faith are not allowed to have government, army, etc. And they listened to Arab states that were telling them to flee in to temporary camps until they destroy the Jewish state. Gaza was one of such locations.
Non-Muslims can only be second rate citizens under Islamic rule and pay special tax.
Dome of Rock was pretty neglected until Jewish migration to the land of Israel also known by Roman name Syria Palestina, as they could not allow an "expired", religion to thrive.

 

And yet, it's the only way forward. Which is why nothing moves forward.