Exposé on Jewish role in US policy is disowned

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,11069-2110150,00.html

Seems pretty spot on to me, have a read:


http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/mear01_.html

 

It's amazing the power of money

 

Its not money its the fact that they run the media...........now where's my tin-foil hat?...aaw - it was on my head the whole time!

 

Thank God somebody in the US has had the balls to write this...the fact that one of the two authors is himself jewish means that the usual neo-Nazi, anti Semitic catcalls will be muted....this paragraph from the Harvard paper sums it up:

The authors:

John Mearsheimer is the Wendell Harrison Professor of Political Science at Chicago, and the author of The Tragedy of Great Power Politics.

Stephen Walt is the Robert and Renee Belfer Professor of International Affairs at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard. His most recent book is Taming American Power: The Global Response to US Primacy.


Well done...be interesting to see how many of the mainstream journals pick this up or run with it......over to Minty !

Lee Shaver

 

Neither blackhawks or F-16's are "Top drawer weaponry", both systems have been sold to other nations (F-16's to Jordan, Egypt, UAE to mention a few arab nations), Blackhawks to a number of nations including China (a small number sold to them in the 80's). If the authors were educated people they may have mentioned the Arrow and Arrow II, or THEL/MTHEL US/Israeli projects, but then they are defensive systems which may not have suited the purpose of the authors.

Which lobby has more money (and therefore influence), the Jewish lobby or the Oil lobby?

If the summary is any indication the report is merely another round of shite throwing by the lunatic left, and offers no accurate insight into US/Israeli politics other than weak implications of the old ZOG "Jooos control the world!" cry.

The authors most definitely need to make themselves a pair of tin foil hats.

 

True they're not now but they once were. That hardly proves the report is wrong.

 

I wont start to convince some of you that there is no world conspiracy by Jews to have world domination, just not worth the effort. However, the way they have written their report is slanted to give a certain impression. Some of their key statements are incorrect or overtly wrong e.g. David v Goliath & War of Independence.

The fact that one of the authors may be Jewish does not mean that he does not have an agenda so to speak. It is often joked about that the worst anti-Semites are Jews themselves.

 

Utter pants, my friend.

I know both these men, and they are anything but members of the "Lunatic Left". They are both hardcore Realists, both are at the very top of the totem pole in their field of study. Mearsheimer especially was a figure scorn for many lefties within the discipline of international relations because of his emphasis that the only only thing that matters in the international system is hard power. That the report has come from these guys has sent a minor earthquake through the academic community.


Having said that, both he and Walt opposed the foray into Iraq from the word go because it was simply not in US interests (in terms of the pursuit and acquisition of power) to do so. Their opposition was not based on any legal, internationalist or humanitarian grounds. They just figured that it would bog down American forces, sap their ability to engage elsewhere and deal with more pressing concerns.

 

Arik,
I have two had friends who have been press and public affairs officers for the Israeli Consulate General in Los Angeles. They make no excuse or apology for the agenda they consistently try to push and the means they use to achieve it. In fact, I have a lot of Jewish-American friends, because we agree on most things, but to try and engage them on Middle eastern politics is like flipping a switch. With only one or two exceptions they become absolutely rabid and any kind of capacity for critical thinking (which they can happily apply to other issues and ideas) disappears in an instant.

A lot of the Bush 43 people were helping out Likud before they took office. Scooty Libby even ran an election campaign for Netenyahu.

I presume you've come across and embraced David Horowitz's latest work?

 

Of course Israel tries to push it's agenda on the USA, each govt. tends to do what it feels is best for it's country and generally America is good for / to Israel. I think that the issue of the work of the article poster is more to do with what is called the 'Jewish lobby' / Jewish role. Personally, I thought this would be called the Israel lobby which is presumably backed by several million Christian Americans who are strong supporters of Israel!!

BTW - Dont know much about Horowitz, personally I dont get too much time to read as I am too busy on the PC. Being too lazy to do a web search - Is he a good author? What does he tend to write about? Can you recommend it?

 

Hmmmm....a quote from the article:

Is that not indirectly the same thing? The article was an interesting read and I actually agree with a lot of it (and I'm NOT the tinfoil-tiara type), but the authors failed to convince me that the current administration's desire to protect Israeli interests can be attributed to anything more than long-range financial benefit. (I am not sure what direct proof would be deemed acceptable...maybe a used napkin with the words "Reminder: invade Iraq, get all the oil!!!!" scrawled on it in Bush's handwriting?) I believe they are spot-on about the garden-variety evangelical Christian's feelings about Israel, but I also think this is being quite cynically exploited by the White House.

That being said, it does drive me nuts that one cannot be critical of U.S. policy on Israel without being accused of being an anti-Semite. Many people who are not raving Nazis realize there's a lot to be critical about. (My Jewish friends, who are admittedly all way Reform and not big fans of Orthodox supremacy, feel the same way that I do.)

 

That statement is an a priori supposition and is the very thing that the report is challenging. But the bigger question is, who gets to define the National Interest and what are their motivations behind it?

That's half the problem. It is very easy for the pro-Israel lobby to smack down criticism of Israel by levying charges of antisemitism. The state of discourse now has reached a point where Jewishlobby and Israel lobby are synonymous. By the way, the Evangelicals still don't like Jews- you still have that whole "you killed Jesus thing" to atone for. It's just that they hate Muslims more and don't like the idea of brown people controlling places like Bethlehem and Jerusalem. (Jesus, as we all know, was a blond-haired, blue-eyed WASP. )

http://www.amazon.com/dp/0895260034/?tag=armrumser-20

Horowitz is getting absolutely slammed from all sides for this piece of sh1t. Not least because it's horribly researched and written. His basic line of thought is that anyone critical of Israel is damaging America. (My new boss makes the list of 101 most dangerous professors btw.) He'll make a ton of money from it, because it'll be seized on by any reactionary nutcase who needs something with an impressive cover and title to decorate their coffee table.

 

On the flip side of the anti-Semitic issue so to speak, are cases where people use Israel as the supposed target or a smoke screen for their own personal prejudices.

The Jewish lobby and the Israel lobby being synonymous is a matter of ignorance. Taking the USA alone, a significant proportion of Jews there dont give 2 hoots about Israel. I would also say that Israel has more non-Jewish supporters througout the world then the 12 million Jews whomake up part of the world's population so Israel lobby and Jewish lobby are not one and the same. Also, secular diaspora Jewry is not as concerned with Israel as it used to be and is more interested in assimilation (e.g. certainly the case in the West).

I will be skipping Horowitz book, I am more of a Sven Hassel type reader

 

Really? That flies in the face of everything I've experienced here in LA for the last five years. The key is the manner in which the political idea of the modern-day state of Israel is slaved to the very core of the Jewish identity. Only in extremely rare cases, have I known or met anyone who does not conform to this pattern. This is a very much part of political socialisation for Jewish Americans.
For many, it doesn't even become a matter of considered opinion and it is no overstatement to say that it almost becomes an article of faith. Much as the destruction of Israel has become an article of faith and incorporated into certain parts of "Islamic" teaching.

I'm going to agree with you in part when I say that the level of ignorance about political life in Israel by some Jewish Americans who profess their support for Israel is staggering, but that is not very surprising. As I said before, support for Israel from my Jewish friends is pretty much reflexive, rather than the result of critical thinking and evaluation.

 

What you say may be the case of those Jews that you have met in L.A. But for each one of them there are plenty who fall off the radar scope and assimilate or really dont give a stuff about Israel / their religion / their culture, etc.
The other point to make here is you describe the manner in which the political idea of the modern-day state of Israel is slaved to the very core of the Jewish identity is down to religion and not politics as Israel has always been a part of Jewish culture long before Zionism was ever formulated as a political concept. That is due to the religous belief and is oft repeated in millenia old prayers and songs, etc.