EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- German Official Warns of Immediate 'Revolution' if EU Adopts US Model
- Eve of Destruction (or How to Destroy a Planet Without Really Trying)
- President Obama Uses a Sledgehammer Against Dissent
- We’re Being Watched: How Corporations and Law Enforcement Are Spying on Environmentalists
- 'Masters of Austerity' Targeted as Blockupy Activists Shut Down European Central Bank
- Eve of Destruction (or How to Destroy a Planet Without Really Trying)
- We’re Being Watched: How Corporations and Law Enforcement Are Spying on Environmentalists
- Is Enbridge Building a Secret Keystone Pipeline?
- German Official Warns of Immediate 'Revolution' if EU Adopts US Model
- President Obama Uses a Sledgehammer Against Dissent
Popular content
Today's Top News
A Declaration of Independence from Israel
Israel, without the United States, would probably not exist. The country came perilously close to extinction during the October 1973 war when Egypt, trained and backed by the Soviet Union, crossed the Suez and the Syrians poured in over the Golan Heights. Huge American military transport planes came to the rescue. They began landing every half-hour to refit the battered Israeli army, which had lost most of its heavy armor. By the time the war was over, the United States had given Israel $2.2 billion in emergency military aid.
The intervention, which enraged the Arab world, triggered the OPEC oil embargo that for a time wreaked havoc on Western economies. This was perhaps the most dramatic example of the sustained life-support system the United States has provided to the Jewish state.
Israel was born at midnight May 14, 1948. The U.S. recognized the new state 11 minutes later. The two countries have been locked in a deadly embrace ever since.
Washington, at the beginning of the relationship, was able to be a moderating influence. An incensed President Eisenhower demanded and got Israel's withdrawal after the Israelis occupied Gaza in 1956. During the Six-Day War in 1967, Israeli warplanes bombed the USS Liberty. The ship, flying the U.S. flag and stationed 15 miles off the Israeli coast, was intercepting tactical and strategic communications from both sides. The Israeli strikes killed 34 U.S. sailors and wounded 171. The deliberate attack froze, for a while, Washington's enthusiasm for Israel. But ruptures like this one proved to be only bumps, soon smoothed out by an increasingly sophisticated and well-financed Israel lobby that set out to merge Israel and American foreign policy in the Middle East.
Israel has reaped tremendous rewards from this alliance. It has been given more than $140 billion in U.S. direct economic and military assistance. It receives about $3 billion in direct assistance annually, roughly one-fifth of the U.S. foreign aid budget. Although most American foreign aid packages stipulate that related military purchases have to be made in the United States, Israel is allowed to use about 25 percent of the money to subsidize its own growing and profitable defense industry. It is exempt, unlike other nations, from accounting for how it spends the aid money. And funds are routinely siphoned off to build new Jewish settlements, bolster the Israeli occupation in the Palestinian territories and construct the security barrier, which costs an estimated $1 million a mile.
The barrier weaves its way through the West Bank, creating isolated pockets of impoverished Palestinians in ringed ghettos. By the time the barrier is finished it will probably in effect seize up to 40 percent of Palestinian land. This is the largest land grab by Israel since the 1967 war. And although the United States officially opposes settlement expansion and the barrier, it also funds them.
The U.S. has provided Israel with nearly $3 billion to develop weapons systems and given Israel access to some of the most sophisticated items in its own military arsenal, including Blackhawk attack helicopters and F-16 fighter jets. The United States also gives Israel access to intelligence it denies to its NATO allies. And when Israel refused to sign the nuclear nonproliferation treaty, the United States stood by without a word of protest as the Israelis built the region's first nuclear weapons program.
U.S. foreign policy, especially under the current Bush administration, has become little more than an extension of Israeli foreign policy. The United States since 1982 has vetoed 32 Security Council resolutions critical of Israel, more than the total number of vetoes cast by all the other Security Council members. It refuses to enforce the Security Council resolutions it claims to support. These resolutions call on Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories.
There is now volcanic anger and revulsion by Arabs at this blatant favoritism. Few in the Middle East see any distinction between Israeli and American policies, nor should they. And when the Islamic radicals speak of U.S. support of Israel as a prime reason for their hatred of the United States, we should listen. The consequences of this one-sided relationship are being played out in the disastrous war in Iraq, growing tension with Iran, and the humanitarian and political crisis in Gaza. It is being played out in Lebanon, where Hezbollah is gearing up for another war with Israel, one most Middle East analysts say is inevitable. The U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East is unraveling. And it is doing so because of this special relationship. The eruption of a regional conflict would usher in a nightmare of catastrophic proportions.
There were many in the American foreign policy establishment and State Department who saw this situation coming. The decision to throw our lot in with Israel in the Middle East was not initially a popular one with an array of foreign policy experts, including President Harry Truman's secretary of state, Gen. George Marshall. They warned there would be a backlash. They knew the cost the United States would pay in the oil-rich region for this decision, which they feared would be one of the greatest strategic blunders of the postwar era. And they were right. The decision has jeopardized American and Israeli security and created the kindling for a regional conflagration.
The alliance, which makes no sense in geopolitical terms, does makes sense when seen through the lens of domestic politics. The Israel lobby has become a potent force in the American political system. No major candidate, Democrat or Republican, dares to challenge it. The lobby successfully purged the State Department of Arab experts who challenged the notion that Israeli and American interests were identical. Backers of Israel have doled out hundreds of millions of dollars to support U.S. political candidates deemed favorable to Israel. They have brutally punished those who strayed, including the first President Bush, who they said was not vigorous enough in his defense of Israeli interests. This was a lesson the next Bush White House did not forget. George W. Bush did not want to be a one-term president like his father.
Israel advocated removing Saddam Hussein from power and currently advocates striking Iran to prevent it from acquiring nuclear weapons. Direct Israeli involvement in American military operations in the Middle East is impossible. It would reignite a war between Arab states and Israel. The United States, which during the Cold War avoided direct military involvement in the region, now does the direct bidding of Israel while Israel watches from the sidelines. During the 1991 Gulf War, Israel was a spectator, just as it is in the war with Iraq.
President Bush, facing dwindling support for the war in Iraq, publicly holds Israel up as a model for what he would like Iraq to become. Imagine how this idea plays out on the Arab street, which views Israel as the Algerians viewed the French colonizers during the war of liberation.
"In Israel," Bush said recently, "terrorists have taken innocent human life for years in suicide attacks. The difference is that Israel is a functioning democracy and it's not prevented from carrying out its responsibilities. And that's a good indicator of success that we're looking for in Iraq."
Americans are increasingly isolated and reviled in the world. They remain blissfully ignorant of their own culpability for this isolation. U.S. "spin" paints the rest of the world as unreasonable, but Israel, Americans are assured, will always be on our side.
Israel is reaping economic as well as political rewards from its lock-down apartheid state. In the "gated community" market it has begun to sell systems and techniques that allow the nation to cope with terrorism. Israel, in 2006, exported $3.4 billion in defense products—well over a billion dollars more than it received in American military aid. Israel has grown into the fourth largest arms dealer in the world. Most of this growth has come in the so-called homeland security sector.
"The key products and services," as Naomi Klein wrote in The Nation, "are hi-tech fences, unmanned drones, biometric IDs, video and audio surveillance gear, air passenger profiling and prisoner interrogation systems—precisely the tools and technologies Israel has used to lock in the occupied territories. And that is why the chaos in Gaza and the rest of the region doesn't threaten the bottom line in Tel Aviv, and may actually boost it. Israel has learned to turn endless war into a brand asset, pitching its uprooting, occupation and containment of the Palestinian people as a half-century head start in the 'global war on terror.' "
The United States, at least officially, does not support the occupation and calls for a viable Palestinian state. It is a global player, with interests that stretch well beyond the boundaries of the Middle East, and the equation that Israel's enemies are our enemies is not that simple.
"Terrorism is not a single adversary," John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt wrote in The London Review of Books, "but a tactic employed by a wide array of political groups. The terrorist organizations that threaten Israel do not threaten the United States, except when it intervenes against them (as in Lebanon in 1982). Moreover, Palestinian terrorism is not random violence directed against Israel or 'the West'; it is largely a response to Israel's prolonged campaign to colonize the West Bank and Gaza Strip. More important, saying that Israel and the US are united by a shared terrorist threat has the causal relationship backwards: the US has a terrorism problem in good part because it is so closely allied with Israel, not the other way around."
Middle Eastern policy is shaped in the United States by those with very close ties to the Israel lobby. Those who attempt to counter the virulent Israeli position, such as former Secretary of State Colin Powell, are ruthlessly slapped down. This alliance was true also during the Clinton administration, with its array of Israeli-first Middle East experts, including special Middle East coordinator Dennis Ross and Martin Indyk, the former deputy director of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, AIPAC, one of the most powerful Israel lobbying groups in Washington. But at least people like Indyk and Ross are sane, willing to consider a Palestinian state, however unviable, as long as it is palatable to Israel. The Bush administration turned to the far-right wing of the Israel lobby, those who have not a shred of compassion for the Palestinians or a word of criticism for Israel. These new Middle East experts include Elliott Abrams, John Bolton, Douglas Feith, the disgraced I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz and David Wurmser.
Washington was once willing to stay Israel's hand. It intervened to thwart some of its most extreme violations of human rights. This administration, however, has signed on for every disastrous Israeli blunder, from building the security barrier in the West Bank, to sealing off Gaza and triggering a humanitarian crisis, to the ruinous invasion and saturation bombing of Lebanon.
The few tepid attempts by the Bush White House to criticize Israeli actions have all ended in hasty and humiliating retreats in the face of Israeli pressure. When the Israel Defense Forces in April 2002 reoccupied the West Bank, President Bush called on then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to "halt the incursions and begin withdrawal." It never happened. After a week of heavy pressure from the Israel lobby and Israel's allies in Congress, meaning just about everyone in Congress, the president gave up, calling Sharon "a man of peace." It was a humiliating moment for the United Sates, a clear sign of who pulled the strings.
There were several reasons for the war in Iraq. The desire for American control of oil, the belief that Washington could build puppet states in the region, and a real, if misplaced, fear of Saddam Hussein played a part in the current disaster. But it was also strongly shaped by the notion that what is good for Israel is good for the United States. Israel wanted Iraq neutralized. Israeli intelligence, in the lead-up to the war, gave faulty information to the U.S. about Iraq's alleged arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. And when Baghdad was taken in April 2003, the Israeli government immediately began to push for an attack on Syria. The lust for this attack has waned, in no small part because the Americans don't have enough troops to hang on in Iraq, much less launch a new occupation.
AP Photo/Hatem Moussa Armed Palestinian women burn Israeli and U.S. flags during a protest against Israel's operations in the Gaza Strip and Lebanon.Israel is currently lobbying the United States to launch aerial strikes on Iran, despite the debacle in Lebanon. Israel's iron determination to forcibly prevent a nuclear Iran makes it probable that before the end of the Bush administration an attack on Iran will take place. The efforts to halt nuclear development through diplomatic means have failed. It does not matter that Iran poses no threat to the United States. It does not matter that it does not even pose a threat to Israel, which has several hundred nuclear weapons in its arsenal. It matters only that Israel demands total military domination of the Middle East.
The alliance between Israel and the United States has culminated after 50 years in direct U.S. military involvement in the Middle East. This involvement, which is not furthering American interests, is unleashing a geopolitical nightmare. American soldiers and Marines are dying in droves in a useless war. The impotence of the United States in the face of Israeli pressure is complete. The White House and the Congress have become, for perhaps the first time, a direct extension of Israeli interests. There is no longer any debate within the United States. This is evidenced by the obsequious nods to Israel by all the current presidential candidates with the exception of Dennis Kucinich. The political cost for those who challenge Israel is too high.
This means there will be no peaceful resolution of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. It means the incidents of Islamic terrorism against the U.S. and Israel will grow. It means that American power and prestige are on a steep, irreversible decline. And I fear it also means the ultimate end of the Jewish experiment in the Middle East.
The weakening of the United States, economically and militarily, is giving rise to new centers of power. The U.S. economy, mismanaged and drained by the Iraq war, is increasingly dependent on Chinese trade imports and on Chinese holdings of U.S. Treasury securities. China holds dollar reserves worth $825 billion. If Beijing decides to abandon the U.S. bond market, even in part, it would cause a free fall by the dollar. It would lead to the collapse of the $7-trillion U.S. real estate market. There would be a wave of U.S. bank failures and huge unemployment. The growing dependence on China has been accompanied by aggressive work by the Chinese to build alliances with many of the world's major exporters of oil, such as Iran, Nigeria, Sudan and Venezuela. The Chinese are preparing for the looming worldwide clash over dwindling resources.
The future is ominous. Not only do Israel's foreign policy objectives not coincide with American interests, they actively hurt them. The growing belligerence in the Middle East, the calls for an attack against Iran, the collapse of the imperial project in Iraq have all given an opening, where there was none before, to America's rivals. It is not in Israel's interests to ignite a regional conflict. It is not in ours. But those who have their hands on the wheel seem determined, in the name of freedom and democracy, to keep the American ship of state headed at breakneck speed into the cliffs before us.
Chris Hedges, who graduated from Harvard Divinity School and was for nearly two decades a foreign correspondent for The New York Times, is the author of "American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America."
©2007 TruthDig.com
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

108 Comments so far
Show AllWe use israel like a condom in the middle-east just as we use pakistan in south asia. Its only our 'interests' that are permanent and in the meanwhile we enable numerous racist, apartheid countries and dicktators to do our bidding.
We need to oust Israeli interest from our government; we should not be paying a cent to this revolting regime nor allowing it's lobbyists to enter Washington. I think Israel believes even more than Bush in entering a holy war against Islam, and it may kill us all if they succeed in expanding the war to Iran.
http://www.dreamingearth.net
Graeme July - I didn't say Israel has high moral values. I said Israel's moral values are higher that the surrounding countries. - Higher is not necessarily high.
My problems with criticizing Israel is not with the criticism itself. It's when the writer is using lies to "prove" its point.
Also I have some issues with the over criticism of Israel, while ignoring other much more critical cases of Genocide, brutality and aggression.
What CD are doing by flooding the net with anti-Israeli and anti American articles is a phenomena called by Noam Chomski: "Manufacturing Consent".
What should be required reading will, undoubtedly pass into oblivion. The lethal policies and influence of Israel over Washington and everyone in it, are so extraordinary that no single person can do anything about them, and no organization does or can exist to do anything to counteract them. Any such organization would be decimated by a tidal wave of rhetoric prominently featuring the standard accusations of anti-semetism and holocaust recitals. And so America is being destroyed along with the future of most of the world by a tiny, well organized, unstoppable organization... it is the stuff of bad novels and silly movies. And it is coming to a theater nearest you sooner than you think.
Why isn't there an anti-lobby organization in the U.S. that can fight such outfits like AIPAC tooth and nail, which means funding politicians critical and disdainful of Israel?
Also, does not every American Jew have a moral obligation to denounce Israel as a rogue state? And yet, where exactly is that chorus? The few (like Norman Finkelstein) who do speak out pay a terrible personal price.
Why isn't there an anti-lobby organization in the U.S. that can fight such outfits like AIPAC tooth and nail, which means funding politicians critical and disdainful of Israel?
Also, does not every American Jew have a moral obligation to denounce Israel as a rogue state? And yet, where exactly is that chorus? The few (like Norman Finkelstein) who do speak out pay a terrible personal price.
The Israelis are tough and intelligent people, and they can take care of themselves. It would be hard without Uncle Sam and his deep pockets to step in every time the Israelis got a paper cut, but should they choose, Israel could easily defend the pre-1967 borders.
Should cooler heads prevail without Uncle Sam wanting to test and sell weapons on middle-east soil, the Israelis may even abandon the 2-state solution and be a multi-cultural state.
There is probably not a country in the world whose interests are so OPPOSITE of our own as Israel's. On issue after issue, Israel's "interests" as defined by the rabid Zionist-expansionists--from oil, to Iran, to Palestinian ethnic cleansing, and on and on--are fundamentally hurting the United States.
We need a paradigm shift here. Any elected official, such as Joe Lie-berman, who supports Israel at the expense of the US, should be impeached, indicted, and hanged for treason. Only a good purge of such criminal elements will return us to a position of world respect and strength. But I fear Chris Hedges is correct: We are too bound by the corrupt lobby system to change in time to prevent our national destruction--which is exactly where these policies are leading.
This point of view so badly needs to be heard. So powerful is the Israeli lobby that we march toward the brink of disaster without hardly any discussion whatsoever. This excellent exposition by Hedges is long overdue.
Thank you Chris Hedges-another courageous voice and may the voices of justice continue to grow louder!!
If Israel consisted of a one square mile plot, in the middle of
the negev, I still think that the arabs would be determined to crush it. The problem, as they see it, seems to be non-muslims having sovereignty over what they consider muslims lands.
"Why isn't there an anti-lobby organization in the U.S. that can fight such outfits like AIPAC tooth and nail, which means funding politicians critical and disdainful of Israel?"
Because almost every single US politician has been indoctrinated into believing the right wing Bible: Take care of Israel as a practical way of serving Christ. Jesus was Jewish.
Read Howard Zinn's article from yesterday. Pro-Israel is so deeply entrenched into American's psyche that I suspect if you set up a lobby against AIPAC that you would rightfully be labeled anti-semite. If you're an anti-semite, then you are most likely to be a terrorist full of hate.
Never mind that Christ said something profoundly controversial: "Hate your enemies. Kill their women and children. Bomb them, nuke them I don't care." Oops, wrong quote.
great article, but i think hedges misses the point that the US, rightly or wrongly, perceives it to be in its interests to maintain such tight ties to the colonial settler state israel. there's always a basis for stirring up trouble in the ME, and it always requires US presence, if not intervention. would we have such a tight relationship w/israel if there wasn't so much oil next door? probably not. it's difficult for any of us peons to know how seriously the political elites take the right wing fundy bible thumping pro israel nonsense. some of them undoubtedly are true believers, including our prez, i'd guess. some are not, incl. our v.p.
in any case, we share some strikingly similar ideologies about ourselves, the US & israel, going back to ww2 and the cold war (and the bible). the promised land narrative, the great hope of (world or jewish) civilization, being surrounded by a sea of enemies (soviets or arabs, or now arabs for both of us), and other things. we also share the fact that our societies were thoroughly corrupted by the conflict w/nazism, the embrace of perpetual war and the national security state.
anyway, just some thoughts.
If only our "leaders" had the foresight of the Chinese. Instead of getting trapped in Israel's war crimes and land theft, we should be solving global warming and world poverty. The US Congress and this administration are criminally negligent of their duties. The very concept of a state based on religion is deeply discriminatory, apartheid, and retrogressive. Why should our tax dollars support an apartheid state steeped in war crimes. If the "Quartet" wants pre-conditions for a Middle East peace, how about this: end the occupation first--then we'll talk about aid to Israel.
Fondisblue: If Israel consisted of a one square mile plot, in the middle of
the negev, I still think that the arabs would be determined to crush it. The problem, as they see it, seems to be non-muslims having sovereignty over what they consider muslims lands.
I would say the same things about Israel and what they are doing now to the Muslims and Christians Arabs in what they believe are Jewish lands which they believe Jews only have sovereignty over.
This is the whole problem. A one state solution where all have equality is the answer.
http://www.cnionline.org/
Shark your anti-lobby link is above. I would also suggest www.wrmea.com
Just in case you haven't seen:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N294FMDok98&mode=user&search=
Thanks dcbeltway. Another good site is www.cactus48.com.
However, these outfits look miniscule compared to the Israeli lobby. There needs to be a serious menace to the lobby, an organization that can dole out tens of millions of dollars if need be to counteract the lies and bullying of pro-Israel groups and individuals.
Again, my question is, What can people like Hedges and the rest of us do beyond just writing and talking? And wouldn't you agree that every American Jew has a moral obligation to condemn Israel as an apartheid state? Precious few (like Norm Finkelstein) do. Many of the so-called Israel critics (e.g., Noam Chomsky, Michael Lerner) don't go far enough.
#
fondisblue July 2nd, 2007 3:14 pm
If Israel consisted of a one square mile plot, in the middle of
the negev, I still think that the arabs would be determined to crush it. The problem, as they see it, seems to be non-muslims having sovereignty over what they consider muslims lands.
----
Seems to me that from viewing the facts, the opposite is true. Specifically:
If Palestine consisted of a one square mile plot, in the middle of the Negev, I still think that the Israelis would be determined to crush it. The problem, as they see it, seems to be non-Jews having sovereignty over what they consider Jewish lands.
So I must ask, which statement is closer to the truth/facts, and which statement is closer to propaganda? Think about it.
Peace!
dcbeltway -- on my way down the blog to post a reply to fondisblue (something like this: "If Israel consisted of a one square mile plot, in the middle of the negev, I still think that the arabs would be determined to crush it. The problem, as they see it, seems to be non-muslims having sovereignty over what they consider muslims lands" -- a view with which decent people should not sympathize -- just decent people should not sympathize with the view that "God made a covenant with Abram, saying: 'To your descendants I have given this land, from the river of Egypt as far as the great river the Euphrates. The land of the Kenites, Kenizites, Kadmonites; the Chitties, Perizites, Refaim; the Emorites, Canaanites, Gigashites and Yevusites.' - Genesis 15:18-21 and that that some how that means that Israelis today are justified in holding other peoples land in fee simple. You beat me to it. But query -- will either, as you suggest, a "one state solution where all have equality", or, as Shane envisions, Israel as a "multi-cultural state" really be "the answer."?
Actually, it was the Sinai that Ike kicked Israel out of following the Suez Crisis and he had the guts to do it just before the presidential election in 1956.
Zoya, thanks for sharing the YouTube video. It was excellent.
Annemarie notes:
If Israel consisted of a one square mile plot, in the middle of
the negev, I still think that the arabs would be determined to crush it. The problem, as they see it, seems to be non-muslims having sovereignty over what they consider muslims lands.
—-
Seems to me that from viewing the facts, the opposite is true. Specifically:
If Palestine consisted of a one square mile plot, in the middle of the Negev, I still think that the Israelis would be determined to crush it. The problem, as they see it, seems to be non-Jews having sovereignty over what they consider Jewish lands.
#################
Actually both of you are right but the source of this emnity is two fold--The British lying to both Zionists and Palestinian Arabic peopls over what their intentions concerning the dissoloution of their protectorate (under the League of Nations) and the American enabling of Ziuonist imperialism siknce the '67 war.
That being said, what is most misunderstood by most westerners is the refusal on the part of many Palestinians to recognize "Israel's right to exist".
AIPAC and other Zionist propagandists spin thiw to mean that Arabs don't want to see any Israeli country exist. What is actually the bone of contention is the exact territory of Isreal. Zionists want all of Jerusalem and the Gol;an Heights, and as much of the captured West Bank as they can gobble up. This despite UN Resolution 242 which calls for the return of all occupied territories to thier original owners since hoatilities have ceased.
The other unresolved matter is the ethnic cleansing of nearly a million Palestinians BEFORE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF ISREAL by the terrorist Irgun forces who moved into a town, gave everybody twenty minutes to pack up and leave (under threat of armed assault) and then bulldozed the community.
For those of you who just might think the Poet is parroting Arabic Islamofascist propaganda, go read about it yourself from an Israeli Scholar Ilan Pappe at:
http://www.ilanpappe.org/
Bottom line: Hedges is right, Israel ought to be abandoned by the US but will not because they have nukjes and the will to blackmail the world by thier use so expect AIPAC and the Zioniss to be exercising thier middle fingers at the rest of the world for quite a while.
As a US citizen I feel like I'm not being represented by the government. We citizen's stand at the back of a long line of lobbyists and foreign intersest. The only thing we are usefull for is paying for everything this conflaguration of psycho's thinks up.
They control the media, they control the politicians. I personally don't have anything against the Jewish, but like our wacko government I don't necessarily believe the Israeli government represents the sentiments of it's citizens either.
Let's face it both of our counties are being run by mobsters.
People who support Israel should do what they can to stop this influence by AIPAC and the Israeli right wing in the US.
What will happen imo is that opposition to Israel will grow but it will be hidden because of the pressures to keep silent. But bit by bit the money going to Israel will diminish. There will not be enough Americans to sustain support for Israel.
Zoya
I've sent the video to others. It is excellant
Israel is a terrorist state
AIPAC is a terrorist organization
Alan Dershowitz ????? What a joke he is.
Didn't Norman Finkelstein disprove & discredit this pathological liar enough already
If they take from AIPAC I take my money and my vote elsewhere. I don't support traitors
There is no such thing as supporting a "good" Israel. The unpleasant fact of the matter is that the state was created by dispossessing the indigenous population.
The only moral and humane thing to do is to jettison the Jewish state and allow all Palestinians driven away to return to their homeland.
This is a good article, but the author is seriously mistaken about one thing. The statement "Israel, without the United States, would probably not exist" due to the USA's assistance during the October 1973 war is completely false, and obviously so. It is now a well-known fact that by October 1973 Israel already possessed a nuclear arsenal. So even if the USA had not helped Israel during that war, Israel would have survived. All it would have had to do is destroy Cairo, or Damascus, or both. The war would have been over and Israel would have won.
Mark Marshall
Toronto
"Israel was born at midnight May 14, 1948. The U.S. recognized the new state 11 minutes later. The two countries have been locked in a deadly embrace ever since."
"Deadly" would be accurate since we don't even have an officially signed peace treaty with them, yet we continue to send them billions of dollars every year while they bomb our USS Liberty. That was just a deadly thank you note.
"The impotence of the United States in the face of Israeli pressure is complete."
That's an understatement. U.S. citizens should take up a collection and send our representatives at least a two year supply of viagra to enable them to perform for the benefit of this country before Israeli interests. That would be a novel performance, don't ya think?
Without a Palestinian State, there will never be peace in the Middle East!
Very fine article.
surprised the US-based IDF hasn't sent a rapid response team to contain the damage.
fondisblue's "square mile" remark shows the pervasive ignorance of the history of Israel. Prior to the Balfour Resolution of 1918, Jews got along in peace and mutual respect with their Arab neighbors. They were about 10% of the total population.
the Zionist agenda of aggression and racist contempt has fatally alienated Arab & Jew. In collusion with an imperial agenda of the West, the Zionist determination to acquire Arab lands by any means necessary, has resulted in the rise of a militant Islam.
Israel is a semi-autonomous US military base.
There is no chance at this late date that it will ever establish a garrison state strong enough to resist the hatred it has engendered in its neighbors, therefore its sustainability is doubtful.
Hodges underestimates US aid. Given loan guarantees that are never repaid and other sources not listed in official budgets, US support is about 10 billion per year.
For a better perspective on why there is so much emnity between Israeli's and Palestinians as well as Israeli Arabic peoples, see:
http://www.ilanpappe.org/
"By the time the barrier is finished it will probably in effect seize up to 40 percent of Palestinian land."
Actually, the revised barrier will only take 5-8% of the West Bank. This will place roughly 3/4 of the settlers on the Isreal side of the fence.
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC05.php?CID=2268
"While Sharon denies any link between the contours of the fence and the shape of a final-status deal, the fence is undeniably moving closer to the Clinton parameters of 2000. Early Palestinian fears that the fence would encircle them have not materialized. Moreover, with the fence placing 99.7 percent of West Bank Palestinians to its east and 74 percent of Israeli settlers to the west, the modified fence contours reinforce the trend of demography trumping geography. Taken together, this amended fence will serve not as a catalyst to impede a two-state solution, but rather to facilitate such an outcome."
Later,
Fence? Its a wall but I suppose by your definition Cicero the Berlin wall was also a fence. Of course when you get your talking points from the Pro-Israel Washington Institute then that explains everything: http://www.wrmea.com/backissues/0791/9107030.htm
For those of you who think this think-tank isn't biased look no further than superneocon Richard Pearle who is on their board.
I know this sounds very far-fetched. But don't ever underestimate Israel . The Jewish people , conditioned by centuries of pogroms ,culminating in the Holocaust, are the ultimate survivors.
Should China emerge at the very top of the next heap, Israel will use every trick in the book to bring the Chinese to heel.And before you know it the Chinese National Choir will be intoning whole verses from the Torah ,to delirious cheers from vast Chinese audiences.
Awesome article. The neocons are on their last legs here if our people have any say in it. The people of Israel should get a clue and remove the Likudniks before they blow up the world. It seems the AIPAC oligarchy would rather kill and die than give up their money-power.
"People of privilege will always risk their complete destruction rather than surrender any material part of their advantage."
John Kenneth Galbraith
"No form of government, once in power, can be trusted to limit its own ambition, to extend freedom and to wither away. This means that it is up to the citizenry, those outside of power, to engage in permanent combat with the state, short of violent, escalatory revolution, but beyond the gentility of the ballot-box, to insure justice, freedom and well being."
Howard Zinn
FYI,
Russell Kirk was one the the leading post-war conservative intellectuals and was at best lukewarm about the neo-conservatives. Here's one indictment from a lecture he gave at the Heritage Foundation1:
"And not seldom it has seemed as if some eminent Neoconservatives mistook Tel Aviv for the capital of the United States.."
http://www.heritage.org/Research/PoliticalPhilosophy/HL178.cfm
December 15, 1988
The Neoconservatives: An Endangered Species
by Kirk, Russell
Heritage Lecture #178
I am concerned about a number of Americans pushing the idea that Israel is dictating US Middle Eastern policy. That I doubt. What instead may be happening is that right-wing American, and European, political interests are propping up right-wing parties like Likud in Israel and using it to manipulate Middle Eastern policy. I doubt for example that the Bush Junta gives a D*mn about Israelis, but finds it a useful tool to manipulate Middle Eastern policy, and the right-wingers among Israelis find reasons to ally with the current American policy there. From what I have read from Israel, other than the Likud propaganda, is that many Israelis are just as disgusted about what has been happening recently as Americans are about BushCheneyRumsfled policy, but they are steamrollered over domestically and have no real voice. Most of us do not want to be identified with or blamed for the policies of the jerks in the Whitehouse now, and most Israeli are equally disgusted about what the more belligerent Israeli leaders are doing and it is not fair to blame them for what we as citizens should not be blamed for.
Likewise, sane and rational people in the Muslim nations should not be blame for the actions of the belligerent political leaders there.
The Middle East situation is not really about Arabs against Jews and the foreigners meddling in the situation there.. it is about the Greedy rich pigs (of all nations and ethnic and ideological groups) against ordinary decent people, with religious fanatics being manipulated by the greedy rich pigs to divide and conquer and create chaos that is to their advantage.
Europeans and Americans intervened to help install the State of Israel, and Israel has continually occupied more land than it was alloted by the United Nations. Plus, the oil companies feed the tension between Jews and Arabs because it continually gives them an excuse to intervene and meddle in Middle Eastern politics... they could give sh*t about Jews, Arabs, or anyone else except themselves and how much money they get. To the oil companies, everyone else are ants to stepped on and squashed when they get in the way, or manipulated when they can be of use.
One probably way to end Middle Eastern conflict is to allow all nations to nationalize their oil resources, and build healthy and educated societies with those resources... both Islamic and Jewish culture have the character to do just that if they are left alone. But they are not. British Petroleum, Chevron, Shell, and others like them are the Real Terrorists. Arabs and Jews themselves just want food, schools, hospitals, and a decent life for themselves and their families and brothers and sisters.
Isn't this true of our nations as well? Most of us just want democracy, freedom, and a fair distribution of our national resources.
But, the Corporate Terrorists, and corporate-funded and -trained terrorists continually create a mess simply so they can feed their primal compulsions for greed and powerlust, and this is as always achieved by legalised Terror, which includes war, and political subversion by means of sabotage and propaganda and mass psychology often in the forms of antiquated religious superstitions.
Sorry, too late for a declaration of independence after 50 years of illegal marriage (is that golden anniversary?). Just replace the American flags with Israeli flags, and then drink a cup of cool soda to help swallowing your pride. The new name is USRAEL.
I am not an elected politician and have no fear of the Israeli Lobby. So I can come right out and say it. Stop all US aid to Israel! Make illegal any lobbying activities in Congress on behalf of a foreign country....ANY foreign country. Elect representatives who will put US interests ahead of US interests. If they are opposed by Israeli Firsters and ousted from Congress, get more who will run against the Lobby. Israel and its Lobby is like the Alien of movie fame. It is sucking the life out of the United States. Who will stand up and oppose this intrusion into our system so that American interests will be held higher than Israeli interests? Who?
Thank you Chris Hedges for this article. Challenging the censorship of public discussion about the U.S. relationship to Israel is a step. For that to happen in election campaigns or in Congress, it has to happens first in media. Unconditional, uncritical support for Israel, or for any country, has to be questioned. So, articles like these are good to see.
Slowly but steadily we are beginning to hear voices against this dysfunctional relationship weve been having with the racist israeli state. We are equally responsible for what israel is doing to the Palestinians. We aid and abet them for our own reasons (watchdog over middle-east oil). The current state of israel really shouldnt exist.
Restore Democracy - Thanks for your human perspective and expression of sanity in this discussion by including the oil companies. Too bad you are the only one (?) who has done so. I don't think the Brits or Americans or anyone else who helped create Israel really gave a damn about the Jews. It was all about oil and maintaining a presence for that purpose and against the U.S.S.R. Maybe I'm wrong about some of that, maybe not. Some of the best extended discussion I've read about all of this mess is in Tom Robbins' novel, Skinny Legs and All.
RestoreDemocracy, oil companies don't want conflicts in regions they do business in because that insecurity could cause interruption of the flow of oil. So this invasion for the sake of oil doesn't fly anymore. To invade Iraq so that the country would nationalize their oil would definitely serve against the oil companies and our resource hegemony's interest.
Shark007,
"Also, does not every American Jew have a moral obligation to denounce Israel as a rogue state? And yet, where exactly is that chorus? The few (like Norman Finkelstein) who do speak out pay a terrible personal price."
I don't think it is any person's obligation to have to denouce anything that one's people is doing. Just like nobody should be asking "What's with Bin-Laden?" to every Muslim they see and expect them to denounce him. Did we put a litmus test on every black we saw on the doings of the Black Panthers? Or forcing every Native American to denounce Sitting Bull? But since the Likudnics and AIPAC are prominently claiming everything they're doing are at the behest of the Jewish state (or AmerIsrael interest), the liberal Jews better stand up and claim those interests are not our interests or else everyone would think that there is only one jewish view. If that ocean liner of American imperialistic policy does start to turn and find its time to dispose Israel as useful tool, the johnny come lately shout of criticizing Israel might be too little too late.
Wang, I don't think your example of Bin Laden/Muslims works.
If Bin Laden & his cohorts dispossessed a people from their home and called the stolen land their homeland, and if Wahhabi Muslims lived and paid taxes in the U.S., and if the U.S. were supporting Bin Laden and his settlers, then I would argue that the Muslims would have a moral obligation to speak out.
What if most American Jews sided with the Palestinians and bent over backwards to distinguish Jewishness from Zionism? What if they fought the Lobby with all their might? Would there not be immense progress on the issue?
As it stands, far too many Jews in this country either sit quietly on the sidelines or support blindly and uncritically the State of Israel. For every Norman Finkelstein there are a hundred Norman Podhoretzes, Michael Walzers, and Alan Dershowitzes. And it's really quite a shame.
Be careful! Say anything bad about Israel and you will be censured. DailyKos cut off my ability to comment on blogs after I made an anti Israel comment. Be it conservative or liberal, the one thing you cannot do in America is criticize Israel.
Fondisblue said:
"If Israel consisted of a one square mile plot, in the middle of the negev {sic}, I still think that the arabs {sic} would be determined to crush it."
The above statement revised on the basis of irrefutable evidence on the ground:
If Israel consisted of only one-square-mile plot in the middle of the Negev, I definitely believe it would try to devour the entire Middle East unless they are stopped by the "terrorists" who lived there before1948.
The relationship between the U.S. and Israel brings out the worst in both countries. It's helped to drag the U.S. even further down the road of empire, militarism, and isolation from the international community. There is a pro-Palestinian, pro-peace lobby now that has finally gotten off the ground -- American Association for Palestinian Equal Rights, AAPER (americansforpalestine.org). But it seems like bringing human rights accountability to foreign policy is a systemic issue of challenging how the financial elites, corporate/weapons contractors, narrow interest lobbies, and 'experts'drive foreign policy. Congressman Delahunt's Subcommittee on International Organizations, Human Rights and accountability has been doing some good work and deserves support, recently investigating U.S. corporate ties to Colombian militias who have assassinated trade union activists. That could be a platform for raising the U.S. Israel question, once there's enough public support.
The last 2,000 years has been rough for us Christ-killers. We're getting a little tired of being kicked around. So you guys can bitch all you want, but don't f**k with us, unless you want to see 5 million Bruce Willises ream you new assholes.
Mordechai;
you can go upstairs now. Mommy has a bagel for you.