Romney Comments on Israel

[RobinFinderson]

Please tell me you are joking. That has got to be the dumbest post in a long time. Criticizing Israel is not antisemitic.

Totally joking.

[creekster]

Oh brother. Technicalities. My point is that the American Jews are us and this complaint about Jews tilting America's allegience too far in Israel's favor is backward and ignorant.

Should it be surprising that we support Isreal? They elect thier leaders, push them out of office when they are corrupt, can pubish and say whatever they want and debate the issues of the day openly and all ovder the country, they have excellent schools and universities, they send their children to be educated in U.S. universities, they listen to music (the Stones, Mozart, Jazz, hip hop, etc.), enjoy and create great works of art and literature, they inovate and lead businesses, they don't strap bombs to themselves and blow up families and children, they don't believe crazy stuff (most of them don't), they abhor totalitarianism. It's not about "Jewish money and influence." It sould not suprise anyone that we support Israel.

Well, you are the one that added the parenthetical, presumably to help us follow, but you got it wrong so I just wanted to point that out so we can follow better in the future.

While I also think they are worthy of support for the reasons you spell out, you are kidding yourself if you think that their wealth and influence isnt a part of the equation.

Your notion that they succeed due to their adoption of western ideals is incomplete. It is no technicality to acknowledge the import of their pre-existing culture as part of the equation.

[Maximus]

Totally joking.

good

[Maximus]

Oh brother. Technicalities. My point is that the American Jews are us and this complaint about Jews tilting America's allegience too far in Israel's favor is backward and ignorant.

Should it be surprising that we support Isreal? They elect thier leaders, push them out of office when they are corrupt, can pubish and say whatever they want and debate the issues of the day openly and all ovder the country, they have excellent schools and universities, they send their children to be educated in U.S. universities, they listen to music (the Stones, Mozart, Jazz, hip hop, etc.), enjoy and create great works of art and literature, they inovate and lead businesses, they don't strap bombs to themselves and blow up families and children, they don't believe crazy stuff (most of them don't), they abhor totalitarianism. It's not about "Jewish money and influence." It sould not suprise anyone that we support Israel.

I like Israelis. I like the Israeli system in place for Israelis. They have a great country...for Jews, for Israelis.

It is their government treating Palestinians as second class citizens that I dont like.

[Jeff Lebowski]

But the crazy belief could give us insight concerning how the religious zealots might approach certain situations. That someone might not believe in evolution seems pretty benign when it comes to MAD. That someone would deny the holocaust and call for the destruction of Israel isn't so benign.

But you were making that the point that because they disavow the holocaust, they will somehow be less concerned about self-preservation and therefore not susceptible to MAD. I don't see the connection. Yes, that makes them more dangerous to Israel, but what does that have to do with MAD?

[SeattleUte]

Well, you are the one that added the parenthetical, presumably to help us follow, but you got it wrong so I just wanted to point that out so we can follow better in the future.

While I also think they are worthy of support for the reasons you spell out, you are kidding yourself if you think that their wealth and influence isnt a part of the equation.

Your notion that they succeed due to their adoption of western ideals is incomplete. It is no technicality to acknowledge the import of their pre-existing culture as part of the equation.

Too often Jews and Gentiles alike highlight the tormented and tragic relations between them in history and today while not appreciating the symbiosis between Jews and Gentiles. Really, it's a remarkable example of symbiosis.

Also, Torah can refer to the Old Testament, and this is often the vernacular today:

http://www.jewfaq.org/torah.htm

[Jeff Lebowski]

THey are nto friends, they are nation states. Those are very different things. ANd yes, allied nation states do this sort of thing all the time.

Then why did the US government make such a bid deal about it at the time and why was it such a scandal and embarrassment for Israel?

Do we have any recent documented cases of other close US allies spying on us? England, France, Germany, etc? Maybe it happens all the time like you say and I just missed it somehow.

To be clear: I don't think this is important part of the US dynamic, but this kind of excuse-making for Israel is part of this interesting phenomenon in the US. They can do just about anything and we defend it.

[Jeff Lebowski]

You obviously don't have experience with adolescent girls.

OK, that was funny.

[Omaha 680]

But you were making that the point that because they disavow the holocaust, they will somehow be less concerned about self-preservation and therefore not susceptible to MAD. I don't see the connection. Yes, that makes them more dangerous to Israel, but what does that have to do with MAD?

It's all branches of the same crazy tree. If you believe the Jews lied about the holocaust and they are subhuman and don't deserve to exist, and you believe they are secretly controlling the world, you might also believe that it is your duty to destroy Israel and plunge the world into chaos because that chaos is what is needed to bring about the coming of the Mahdi.

The clerics in Iran and their current president talk about these things. The quesiton is: do they actually believe it or are they just using the rhetoric to maintain power? I don't know the answer.

Edit: I hate to pull out the Nazi comparison but it's fresh on my mind after the book I just finished. No one wanted to believe Hitler meant what he said about the Jews. It was just political theater and things would calm down eventually, they said. Well, sometimes a leader is crazy enough to mean the crazy things he says. After the Jewish experience of the 20th century, I certainly don't blame them for taking the Iranian government at their word.

[Omaha 680]

Your notion that they succeed due to their adoption of western ideals is incomplete. It is no technicality to acknowledge the import of their pre-existing culture as part of the equation.

I agree. Not to mention that their strong pre-existing cultural identity and traditions is a big part of what helped them to survive as a people through the diaspora. Why weren't they simply absorbed into the cultures of the various places they settled?

[Jeff Lebowski]

I agree that it's extremely unlikely the Iranian leadership would launch a nuclear attack because of MAD and other reasons. But I could see an Iranian device "accidentally" falling into the hands of Hezbollah or a splinter terrorist group who would detonate it in Israel. I also agree that a preemptive strike against Iran would be ineffective, and extremely costly.

Sure. But the minute that a bomb is detonated in the US, pressure would be unstoppable for a counter strike if there was even a whiff of a connection. They would realize this. They aren't complete idiots. I think there would be intense pressure for them to maintain tight control on nukes for a variety of reasons.

MAD works if they are convinced it really exists. But say it is a smallish nuke or dirty bomb and it is "terrorists" who did it, not the nation-state of Iran. Would we obliterate them with nukes? Do they believe we would?

MAD worked with the Soviets because we were talking about military strikes from obvious sources. Terrorism is something completely different.

Do you really think that all of the nukes in the former Soviet republics are significantly safer than nukes in the hands of Iranians? Trust me, we already are relying on MAD to a large degree.

To be clear, I think Iran getting nukes would be a very bad thing. The question I have asked (which very few people have attempted to answer) is not whether we should let them have nukes, but what is the best strategy for dealing with them right now. Obama is building support internationally and applying intense political and economic pressure while keeping military options on the table. Seems like just the right approach for now. For those of you claiming that he is leading us to Armageddon, lay out your arguments in detail.

[Jeff Lebowski]

It's all branches of the same crazy tree. If you believe the Jews lied about the holocaust and they are subhuman and don't deserve to exist, and you believe they are secretly controlling the world, you might also believe that it is your duty to destroy Israel and plunge the world into chaos because that chaos is what is needed to bring about the coming of the Mahdi.

The clerics in Iran and their current president talk about these things. The quesiton is: do they actually believe it or are they just using the rhetoric to maintain power? I don't know the answer.

You are avoiding the main point. Would they attempt to destroy Israel while being fully aware that by doing so they would completely destroy themselves?

What could possibly be a stronger deterrent than obliteration?

Edit: I hate to pull out the Nazi comparison but it's fresh on my mind after the book I just finished. No one wanted to believe Hitler meant what he said about the Jews. It was just political theater and things would calm down eventually, they said. Well, sometimes a leader is crazy enough to mean the crazy things he says. After the Jewish experience of the 20th century, I certainly don't blame them for taking the Iranian government at their word.

Poor analogy.

Do you think Hitler would have exterminated the Jews knowing that if he did so, Germany would be instantly turned to a sea of glass?

[Jeff Lebowski]

For those of you in the "let's bomb them now" camp, were you advocating the same strategy to eliminate the North Korean nuclear weapon program which was carried out largely under the watch of George Bush?

If not, what is the difference? If you believe that North Korea is somehow safer or more stable than Iran, I would love to hear the reasons why.

[Maximus]

For those of you in the "let's bomb them now" camp, were you advocating the same strategy to eliminate the North Korean nuclear weapon program which was carried out largely under the watch of George Bush?

If not, what is the difference? If you believe that North Korea is somehow safer or more stable than Iran, I would love to hear the reasons why.

I dont advocate bombing, but North Korea doesnt have any religious hatred of another country. And they already have nukes, they could use one before we could destroy them. The problem is, if we let Iran get a nuke, they will have a lot more influence and power.

[SeattleUte]

I agree. Not to mention that their strong pre-existing cultural identity and traditions is a big part of what helped them to survive as a people through the diaspora. Why weren't they simply absorbed into the cultures of the various places they settled?

That is happening now. They are very concerned about it.