Donald Trump's 2nd term

[Ax^]

I haven't met a single American who considers Kamala anything but an over-promoted, repellent horror. We're not stupid, after all. I reckon the only plausible replacement is the dreaded 3G: Governor Gavin Gruesome.

interesting way of saying Americans just could not handle a black women as president of the united states

 

[Rob Ray]

Tbf there was enough trouble with just the racism when Obama won, and more with the misogyny when Clinton tried and failed. Put them together and you're talking a pretty big electoral segment (of fuckwits).

 

[chandlerp]

Imagine if they teamed up a gay man (Buttigieg ) and Harris. They would melt down.

 

[ska invita]

For the benefit of other readers, that doesn't link to the article. The article link is this:

John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt · The Israel Lobby: the Israel Lobby

Even from within that it says "Clearly, it would be wrong to blame the war in Iraq on ‘Jewish influence’. Rather, it was due in large part to the Lobby’s influence, especially that of the neo-conservatives within it. " and yet "The neo-conservatives had been determined to topple Saddam even before Bush became president."

Israel is like the 52nd US state...it provides a foothold for the US military in the middle east. That is its purpose for US foreing policy. To quote Biden "if it didnt exist we would have to invent it". Israeli governments have their agenda, and lobby for it, but they do not lead. It just so happens it neatly overlaps with US foreign policy objectives in the vast majority of cases. "Securing Israel" is in effect securing a US military outpost.

 

[phildwyer]

Do you think if there was no Israel Lobby those wars wouldnt have happened?

Yes. If the USA followed its self-interest it would ally with the Arabs, who have the oil, which is what the USA needs. The USA has paid a very heavy price for its alliance with Israel, attracting widespread opprobrium for very little recompence.

I agree that there's a moral case for supporting Israel, but international politics isn't conducted on the basis of morality.

So afaics the only reason the USA supports Israel is the lobby. What else could it be?

 

[Silas Loom]

Those notoriously monolithic Arabs . . .

 

[Jeff Robinson]

People who want Biden to win (or want Trump to lose) know that Biden did terribly.

People who want Trump to win think he did awesome, even though he was as abysmal as ever.

Trumpists look at liberal reaction and say "hA eveen his onw Supperters no he did bad!" But the only reason Trumpists don't think the same about their candidate is because they're vile and/or stupid.

 

[phildwyer]

Israel is like the 52nd US state...it provides a foothold for the US military in the middle east. That is its purpose for US foreing policy. To quote Biden "if it didnt exist we would have to invent it". Israeli governments have their agenda, and lobby for it, but they do not lead. It just so happens it neatly overlaps with US foreign policy objectives in the vast majority of cases. "Securing Israel" is in effect securing a US military outpost.

I hadn't seen this when I wrote my last post.

My point is that the US wouldn't need a military outpost in the middle east if it wasn't for its alliance with Israel. The Arabs and Iranians hate us because of our support for Israel.

 

[phildwyer]

Israel is like the 52nd US state...

And the UK is the 51st?

 

[Rob Ray]

If the USA followed its self-interest it would ally with the Arabs, who have the oil

It is allied with Arab states who have oil, Saudi Arabia most notably but also UAE. It isn't, however, allied with Venezuela, which has the single largest proven reserve worldwide and zero interest from the Israelis. Oil very much isn't the defining factor of self-interested US foreign policy any more (if it ever was), especially since the exploitation of oil shale and tight oil effectively regained it self-sufficiency. The US is currently a net exporter.

 

[ska invita]

Yes. If the USA followed its self-interest it would ally with the Arabs, who have the oil, which is what the USA needs. The USA has paid a very heavy price for its alliance with Israel, attracting widespread opprobrium for very little recompence.

I agree that there's a moral case for supporting Israel, but international politics isn't conducted on the basis of morality.

So afaics the only reason the USA supports Israel is the lobby. What else could it be?

Because as in south america or the east or africa, the interests of the "arab" world rarely align with those of the US. Where they can do business - relationship with Saudi for example - they do. Saddam and Gaddaffi for example did not play ball and had to be destroyed. The fact this is aligns with the wishes of Israeli ultranationalists is what makes it a mutually beneficial relationship.

And the UK is the 51st?

yes! but that was tongue in cheek.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Even from within that it says "Clearly, it would be wrong to blame the war in Iraq on ‘Jewish influence’. Rather, it was due in large part to the Lobby’s influence, especially that of the neo-conservatives within it. " and yet "The neo-conservatives had been determined to topple Saddam even before Bush became president."

Israel is like the 52nd US state...it provides a foothold for the US military in the middle east. That is its purpose for US foreing policy. To quote Biden "if it didnt exist we would have to invent it". Israeli governments have their agenda, and lobby for it, but they do not lead. It just so happens it neatly overlaps with US foreign policy objectives in the vast majority of cases. "Securing Israel" is in effect securing a US military outpost.

The article argues otherwise. As dwyer says, it argues that the US's uncritical support for Israel is the source of most of its problems in the region. Given that it was written 18 years ago, the article is quite prescient. It describes the levels of control Israeli lobbyists exert over aspects of government and the media, but how it finds it harder to control what happens in universities. That's quite a decent description of what is happening right now in the US regarding debate over Palestine-Israel. It also describes how Israel frequently refuses to act like the obedient client state, again prescient given events of the last few months.

Some of the facts outlined in the article are indisputable: Israel does receive disproportionately massive aid; it is given this aid unquestioningly in a way that no other state is granted; a very well-run and effective Israeli lobby in the US seeks to control both US policy and debate about US policy; accusations of anti-semitism are weaponised to shut down dissent over any of this.

Hard to dispute any of that, I would have thought.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I meant the Wikipedia article about AIPAC. It's a good introduction to the subject. I cited the book deliberately, because it offers a more in-depth analysis of the problem.

More realistic to think that someone might read a 12,000-word article (as I just did) than a 200,000-word book, though.

 

[Rimbaud]

So afaics the only reason the USA supports Israel is the lobby. What else could it be?

I think there are a lot of complex reasons for it. It would be wrong to say the lobby isn't a factor to some extent, but it is also wrong to say it is the main one, and even more wrong wrong to say it is the only one.

Firstly, Israel is considered to be a dependable ally in a volatile region. The US was an ally of Saddam Hussein's oil rich Iraq during their war with Iran, but then they invaded oil rich US ally Kuwait - it is hardly straightforward to say "just ally with the Arabs."

And if they weren't US allies, they would probably be Russian allies instead which would change the nature of the region in ways detrimental to the US.

Secondly, the role of the holocaust in western historical imagination has made criticism of Israel more complicated and difficult than it would otherwise be.

Thirdly, Israel has an important theological role in the imagination of evangelicals and therefore broader US political culture.

Related to this is a fourth reason - racism. The reality is far more complex and nuanced, but the American right wing basically view the conflict as white "Judeo-Christian" Israelis vs an other of brown Islamic Palestinians. It's a projection and reflection of US domestic racial politics. In fact it is no coincidence that American-Israelis are massively over-represented amongst extremist Israeli settlers (around 15% of settlers are American in origin compared to 2.2% of the Israeli population.)

So yes, the Israeli lobby is a thing, but they operate within a political culture which has other reasons for being pro-Israel, including ideological, cultural and geopolitical reasons.

 

[Silas Loom]

Some of the facts outlined in the article are indisputable: Israel does receive disproportionately massive aid; it is given this aid unquestioningly in a way that no other state is granted; a very well-run and effective Israeli lobby in the US seeks to control both US policy and debate about US policy; accusations of anti-semitism are weaponised to shut down dissent over any of this.

Hard to dispute any of that, I would have thought.

Facts, eh? Indisputable, eh?

1) “Disproportionate” in proportion to what? NATO and Europe? Korea and Taiwan? Ukraine? What’s the formula for counting the right amount of support - per capita, per geographic size, per threat?
2) “Unquestioningly” - so what is this lobby there to overcome?
3) All “US policy” or do you mean US policy concerning Israel and its neighbours?
4) That really does make you sound like someone who has been accused of antisemitism, or who is very keen on people who have been accused of antisemitism, and is huffy about it. Perhaps the cap fits. It certainly does on Dwyer.

 

[Rob Ray]

It's the difference between understanding a lobby exists and is doing its job, and the idea that it's in control. The former is very much true, the latter is not.

 

[editor]

Israel

MODERATOR MODE

You're banned off this thread and any other one where you peddle anti semitic bullshit.

*added mod title

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Indisputable, eh?

1) “Disproportionate” in proportion to what? NATO and Europe? Korea and Taiwan? Ukraine? What’s the formula for counting the right amount of support - per capita, per geographic size, per threat?
2) “Unquestioningly” - so what is this lobby there to overcome?
3) All “US policy” or do you mean US policy concerning Israel and its neighbours?
4) That really does make you sound like someone who has been accused of antisemitism, or who is very keen on people who have been accused of antisemitism, and is huffy about it.

1) compared to every other country in the world
2) Well, that could be down to the success of the lobby, couldn't it?
3) Crucial aspects of US policy in the region - happy to clarify
4) Nope. If you don't see that anti-semitism is weaponised in this way by the Israeli government and its allies and lobbyists, then you haven't been paying attention. I could give you quotes if you want.

5) Maybe read the article linked? You might learn something.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

And there we go. That an effective Israeli lobby exists in the US is undisputed but anyone expressing ideas about its effectiveness that go beyond a certain level gets banned from the thread.

You don't have to agree with dwyer. But it seems we're not even allowed to hear him.

 

[ska invita]

The article argues otherwise. As dwyer says, it argues that the US's uncritical support for Israel is the source of most of its problems in the region. Given that it was written 18 years ago, the article is quite prescient. It describes the levels of control Israeli lobbyists exert over aspects of government and the media, but how it finds it harder to control what happens in universities. That's quite a decent description of what is happening right now in the US regarding debate over Palestine-Israel. It also describes how Israel frequently refuses to act like the obedient client state, again prescient given events of the last few months.

Some of the facts outlined in the article are indisputable: Israel does receive disproportionately massive aid; it is given this aid unquestioningly in a way that no other state is granted; a very well-run and effective Israeli lobby in the US seeks to control both US policy and debate about US policy; accusations of anti-semitism are weaponised to shut down dissent over any of this.

Hard to dispute any of that, I would have thought.

yes im sure...cant read in full as working hah...but I dispute that it is the tail wagging the dog. Israel is effectively client state and a good investment. its a bit more complicated than that, but thats what it boils down to. Its strategic location is paramount

 

[littlebabyjesus]

yes im sure...cant read in full as working hah...but I dispute that it is the tail wagging the dog. Israel is effectively client state and a good investment. its a bit more complicated than that, but thats what it boils down to. Its strategic location is paramount

The article is interesting. I would recommend reading it when you can. It argues that Israel is a bad investment for the US - and a bad client state.

 

[Spymaster]

You're banned off this thread and any other one where you peddle anti semitic bullshit.

Oh, ffs, did you actually read what he was posting or is this just a kneejerk reaction to some idiots reporting the post?

 

[ska invita]

The article is interesting. I would recommend reading it when you can. It argues that Israel is a bad investment for the US - and a bad client state.

i will...and no doubt it has an influence....but US foreign policy is always going to be viciously self-serving. I'm sure those murderous planners have worked out its a net gain for their particular objectives. Of course I wish it were a different conclusion.
Worth considering also that Israel was close to wider ...what's the word....recognition? accord with neighbouring countries (arguably why Hamas went for it when they did)
back to work

 

[krtek a houby]

Israel

Oh just fucking fuck off forever

 

[Spymaster]

Oh just fucking fuck off forever

Can't you do the same, you thick prat?

Everything's better on these boards when you're on a flounce.

 

[krtek a houby]

You're banned off this thread and any other one where you peddle anti semitic bullshit.

About time.

Perhaps give the boot to his tiny band of synthetic supporters as well?

 

[krtek a houby]

And there we go. That an effective Israeli lobby exists in the US is undisputed but anyone expressing ideas about its effectiveness that go beyond a certain level gets banned from the thread.

You don't have to agree with dwyer. But it seems we're not even allowed to hear him.

Who wants to listen to proven antisemites?

Urban needs a purge of these arseholes.

 

[Spymaster]

Perhaps give the boot to his tiny band of synthetic supporters as well?

Urban needs a purge of these arseholes.

Here we go again. Calling for others to be banned rather than taking a good hard look at yourself, you obsequious little arsehole.

You are not a moderator.

And no, we're not on mutual ignore. It was for a month, nearly two months ago.

 

[kabbes]

Who wants to listen to proven antisemites?

Urban needs a purge of these arseholes.

krtek, I very rarely disagree with your politics but by God are you disruptive and annoying with your constant calling of the banhammer for anybody you disagree with.

 

[krtek a houby]

krtek, I very rarely disagree with your politics but by God are you disruptive and annoying with your constant calling of the banhammer for anybody you disagree with.

Fair enough.

It's not a popularity contest.

Personally, I'd rather see the antisemitic contingent booted off the site, but if you think there's mileage to be had by conversation - go for it.

I've seen other sites go down, with the likes of the bigots. I don't wish to see the same here.