Netanyahu today, Netanyahu tomorrow, Netanyahu forever!

[Odelay]

The results of today's election in Israel are not a big surprise to anyone actually paying attention - which rules out just about 95% of the media that reported on the race.

The only interesting thing is as Billmon in Twitter noted: Netanyahu decided to go the Full Monty on settlements forever to ensure a big turnout of the right wing base. Again, no one who has been paying attention is surprised that Netanyahu is declaring there will be no two state agreement while he is PM. The prospect of peace during his reign has always been zero - he just felt the need to dispel any illusions with his honest declaration.

So Palestinians, there you have it. The Israeli voters have left you in no doubt about what they think of your dreams. The Israeli Left and Middle have been spayed, neutered, given a ball gag, and enough Xanax to remain catatonic for the next decade. They are out of commission. Your move.

[broncofan]

I was disappointed that Netanyahu won. The Israeli public of course is not a monolith so not all Israeli voters have said what you claim they've said. I believe if Herzog had won and in good faith moved towards negotiations, you would have taken a cynical view of his actions at every point in time. Perhaps this is why we did not hear your interested view championing any Israeli alternative in advance of the election, but your cynicism after seeing the worst possible outcome is not surprising.

What's interesting is that we live in a country that carried out an invasion of Iraq that was illegal under international law. In addition to that invasion there were also documented acts of torture at black sites. In 2004, the U.S. public voted for George W Bush. Would you say the U.S. public let the Iraqis know that they support torture or support illegal invasions by voting for Bush? By your logic, even by casting a vote against him, you were and are a supporter of torture and militarism because you're part of the electorate.

When Dahlia created the thread about the six million Jews I was very heartened at your support, but I was puzzled that your reaction was that a major problem with her response was that it would undermine the credibility of real supporters of the Palestinians. Of course, she said nothing about Israel at all so of course I thought; someone is denying genocide and he's worried that it will weaken his position politically. Of course I am not saying that you did this out of animosity towards Jewish people..but you have a way of thinking this political issue trumps all others or is even responsible for altering events outside of its conflict zone (like it has some sort of mystical power akin to a curse that prevents peace and prosperity anywhere else on the globe).

Let me ask you something. When Palestinians voted for Hamas, a group that in its charter calls for the murder of Jews wherever they may be, is that a position worthy of guilt? Or does the guilt only run one way? If Palestinians vote for bad politicians, they do so as a reaction to Israel, but if Israelis do, they do so because of a rock solid belief system completely unaffected by the political climate they find themselves in?

And then the comments about the creation of the Palestinian state helping avoid further radicalization in Syria. I know an author had said that, but I don't even understand the logic in it.

[broncofan]

The results of today's election in Israel are not a big surprise to anyone actually paying attention -

Let me ask you. You thought Netanyahu was going to win and the polling showing he was behind was wrong. Did you say this in advance of the election? If you thought Netanyahu would win what were you basing that on?

[broncofan]

I realize my first post bordered on the personal and so I apologize to Odelay...I do think you believe this issue has implications far beyond its direct effect on the Palestinians and I do not. This is a sticking point for me (the other is about the entire electorate being at fault because the bad guy won 30 of 120 parliamentary seats).

Anyhow, as an olive branch, here's an article you might consider some good news. Obama did not congratulate Bibi (I applaud that decision) and his administration has struck direct blows at Bibi's election tactics.

For the record I thought Netanyahu was going to lose. Perhaps Obama can make the Israelis realize that Netanyahu puts in jeopardy the diplomatic relationship between the U.S and Israel.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2...on-white-house

[Odelay]

I was disappointed that Netanyahu won. The Israeli public of course is not a monolith so not all Israeli voters have said what you claim they've said. I believe if Herzog had won and in good faith moved towards negotiations, you would have taken a cynical view of his actions at every point in time.

You may be right. From everything I've read about Herzog and Livni I am not all that impressed that either one would have been committed or serious about negotiating a peace. I don't expect you to remember everything I've said in this forum, but at one time I noted that Netanyahu now represents the middle of the Israeli political spectrum and that someone like Ariel Sharon, today, would represent someone to the left of the current left. By the way, that's not my original thought, I was just apeing someone I read.

Perhaps this is why we did not hear your interested view championing any Israeli alternative in advance of the election, but your cynicism after seeing the worst possible outcome is not surprising.

The fact is, I hit "submit" on less than half of the things I write at Hung Angels. I did write something before the election but thought better of posting it. Well over half the shit I write isn't really worth reading. There are writers far, far better than me in stating my views. A guy like Max Blumenthal writes rings around me.

In 2004, the U.S. public voted for George W Bush. Would you say the U.S. public let the Iraqis know that they support torture or support illegal invasions by voting for Bush? By your logic, even by casting a vote against him, you were and are a supporter of torture and militarism because you're part of the electorate.

You nailed it. Those are my views. I posted a thread in this politics forum about no longer caring. I own my part in the odious Bush administration and their immoral policies, and I own my part in the only slightly less odious Obama administration policies. I've been really disappointed in Obama. There is corruption in US politics, through and through. Basically we're all helpless to stop the corruption, but I don't think that lets us off the hook for allowing these people to represent us, even with nay votes. As I said in the thread, I can't do anything about my involvement in the US anymore and I'm not wealthy enough to move away yet, but once I am, then I will.

When Dahlia created the thread about the six million Jews I was very heartened at your support, but I was puzzled that your reaction was that a major problem with her response was that it would undermine the credibility of real supporters of the Palestinians.

My cynicism slips sometimes. Sometimes I think someone, somewhere, or a group of someones who might be voting in an election, might wake up and start pushing for positive change. In the long run things do have to change or the entire planet will face an existential crisis. So in the long run, I guess I'm an optimist, but I think some things will get real bad before we face the music. My subject title is bombastic. Netanyahu will be replaced someday. But I'd bet anyone it will be by someone to the right of him. Israel isn't going to get a government to the left of Netanyahu for a long time because the Israeli people don't want it. The demographics are daunting. They're the reverse of the US. Religious Israelis are having huge amounts of children. Meanwhile Reform and non-religious Jews are having very few children. In 10, 20 years, the country will be way more conservative than it is today.

I some ways, even though I'm not impressed with Herzog/Livni, I believe they were Israel's last best shot for a long time. Something really bad will probably have to happen before Israeli voters consider any moderate leader.

you have a way of thinking this political issue trumps all others or is even responsible for altering events outside of its conflict zone (like it has some sort of mystical power akin to a curse that prevents peace and prosperity anywhere else on the globe).

I do believe the I/P conflict is the worst thing for global peace because I have friends from Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon and Palestine who all say the same thing... the US position relative to the I/P conflict is disastrous. These are smart professionals, not radicals. They have lived and worked in the Western world. They might be Muslims but they don't reject Western values. They do, however, reject everything that's happening in regards to the I/P conflict. It truly is a curse on the world.

Let me ask you something. When Palestinians voted for Hamas, a group that in its charter calls for the murder of Jews wherever they may be, is that a position worthy of guilt? Or does the guilt only run one way? If Palestinians vote for bad politicians, they do so as a reaction to Israel, but if Israelis do, they do so because of a rock solid belief system completely unaffected by the political climate they find themselves in?

The Palestinians do bear responsibility for their own actions, including who they elect. Absolutely. My friends would say the same. But who holds all the power in this conflict? Who bears the most responsibility as Israeli leader after leader allow more and more settlements every day, every year?

I know you have significant problems with my views. I have no problem with that. I used to be a friend of Israel just as most Americans are today. But I've run out of patience. The people and leaders of Israel have burned up any benefit of the doubt I used to give them. I distrust them, thoroughly, and I believe they're setting the world on a needless and treacherous path of destruction and violence. I now believe that creating a homeland for Jews on the Eastern coast of the Mediterranean was a bad idea. The problem is there is no way to turn the clock back. The Israel state will remain so we have to deal with the problem, as is. The thing is, my views are well represented. Blumenthal is only one of many voices on the American Left who are highly critical of everything that is happening in Israel. If you're actually shocked by my ideas, then you're not very well read, and I don't believe that's the case.

It's a bad day for Israel and those supporters, around the world, who are committed to a peaceful Israel.

One final postscript... what Dahlia was saying was garbage. Holocaust deniers are idiots. Just because I disagree with almost everything going on in Israel today, along with their misguided friends in the US and around the world, doesn't mean I support any bullshit revision of history.

[Odelay]

This piece is illuminating on the situation in Israel.

http://mondoweiss.net/2015/03/save-israel-now

The comments give even more food for thought. I assume the comments are moderated because the debate, if not exactly civil is not odious as unmoderated comments always are on the I/P issue.

I will commend Peter Beinart, a journalist who I've been wary of through the years, for retweeting this:

Last night Peter Beinart, the leading liberal Zionist, tweeted a comment by Rep. Adam Schiff on CNN that from now on the US must not veto Palestinian statehood resolutions in the Security Council.

At least he's willing to lay it on the line. Maybe that's a start.

[Odelay]

One other thing I forgot to say.... I am actually impressed with Netanyahu. He took off the mask that maybe he might be willing to negotiate a two state solution. Again, many, including me, never believed it. Now he's living out in the open, with honesty. Just as he always hated Obama, and his move to address Congress was an open and honest declaration of that hatred. Netanyahu might be the most honest nation/state political leader on the planet today.

[broncofan]

One final postscript... what Dahlia was saying was garbage. Holocaust deniers are idiots. Just because I disagree with almost everything going on in Israel today, along with their misguided friends in the US and around the world, doesn't mean I support any bullshit revision of history.

I wouldn't have said you did. No honest person was going to take what she said and use it as an argument against you or the Palestinian cause. I was just wondering why your mind was on that issue...it leads into this final disagreement we have about the pre-eminence of this conflict.

So I agree with almost everything you said. Here is the vehement disagreement:

Odelay:
"I do believe the I/P conflict is the worst thing for global peace because I have friends from Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon and Palestine who all say the same thing... the US position relative to the I/P conflict is disastrous. These are smart professionals, not radicals. They have lived and worked in the Western world. They might be Muslims but they don't reject Western values. They do, however, reject everything that's happening in regards to the I/P conflict. It truly is a curse on the world."

If your friends from these countries say that the Israeli Palestinian conflict is the worst thing for world peace I think they may be extremists. This is not a case of me whitewashing what Israel has done by saying there are worse conflicts out there. But when someone says one conflict is the greatest obstacle to world peace they should have some objective basis for making that claim other than the identity of the parties to the conflict. Over 200,000 Syrians have been killed by Assad (again this does not make the occupation less of a crime than it is). If your moderate friends believe that what Israel has done is worse than gassing children or worse than what Isis is doing then they are relatively oblivious to Muslims killing Muslims and incensed that a government run by Jews has done something quite severe, but at least objectively no more a threat to world peace.

Now let's take this a step further. Let's say they are moderates by not taking their anger and engaging in violence. But what about those who do? If a Jihadist blows himself up in Pakistan and says it's because of Israel, does that make it because of Israel? It undoubtedly means he has a grievance. But did the grievance cause the action? Without the grievance, could he have committed the same attack? Yes, he could have another grievance that makes him feel justified in carrying out an attack. Namely, all of the other conflicts in the world, some of which are more violent could be the pretext.

If you could ask your friends for me this question when you see them: What is it about Israel's actions that make it the greatest threat to world peace when there are other countries that have committed graver human rights abuses? One can say having their land occupied is degrading; I agree. It's also degrading to be buried alive, burned alive or have your head removed with a dull knife. Is Israel more of an affront because they are seen as interlopers who have no right to a nation even within the partition borders? I don't object to them seeing Israel as an obstacle to peace, but seeing it as THE obstacle to peace seems disingenuous.

In a world of responsible people, one person cannot commit an act of violence against an innocent victim and say it is because of a third party who is not present. One cannot kill a women in Arkansas because they were abused by their parents. Likewise, one cannot murder by the hundreds of thousands and say the Zionists made them do it. At some point the most proximate cause, their decision, is the most important cause. Otherwise it seems kind of like an Israeli Butterly Effect to me. A butterfly flaps his wings in Tel Aviv, a suicide bomber detonates in Karachi.

[broncofan]

You nailed it. Those are my views. I posted a thread in this politics forum about no longer caring. I own my part in the odious Bush administration and their immoral policies, and I own my part in the only slightly less odious Obama administration policies. I've been really disappointed in Obama. There is corruption in US politics, through and through. Basically we're all helpless to stop the corruption, but I don't think that lets us off the hook for allowing these people to represent us, even with nay votes. As I said in the thread, I can't do anything about my involvement in the US anymore and I'm not wealthy enough to move away yet, but once I am, then I will.

Actually I disagree with this. I think it's noble but unrealistic. Holding this view makes you consistent, but how will moving away from the U.S. change U.S. policy?

It may make you "feel" less culpable, but in what way are you currently contributing to the policies you oppose? By paying taxes? The U.S. tax base is not getting smaller (and that's not a jibe at your contribution; Uncle Sam wouldn't miss mine either). If you vote your conscience and support grassroots efforts aimed at reform, I don't think you've contributed meaningfully to that which you disagree with. Again, making a difference may require an extraordinary effort, but I'm not sure that failing to make a difference equals complicity.

[broncofan]

One final postscript... what Dahlia was saying was garbage. Holocaust deniers are idiots. Just because I disagree with almost everything going on in Israel today, along with their misguided friends in the US and around the world, doesn't mean I support any bullshit revision of history.

I appreciate that. Someone denying the Holocaust is no reflection on other supporters of the Palestinian cause. But I do hope anti-zionists stop every once in a while to inventory who is using their brand but spreading a different message. Because the myriad of things done in the name of anti-zionism to attempt to make life uncomfortable for diaspora Jews is worth noting and yes, if there is such a thing as a radicalizing pressure, it must run both ways.

I don't doubt that your friends from Jordan, Egypt, and Lebanon have no problem with Jewish people, but that makes them a distinct minority in their countries according to polling done. The polls are not without controversy as they ask such trick questions as do you think the Jews control the media and the banks etc. Why has zionism attracted so many Jews from Egypt and relatively fewer from the U.S? You don't think you might find your answer in Egyptian news channels reporting such exhilarating stories as a shark attack on one of their beaches that was really a zionist plot. There were 75,000 Jews in Egypt in 1948, but maybe they were just really ardent Zionists and really had nothing to fear if they stayed.

So when you talk about Israel being able to influence Palestinian political affiliations with their actions more than vice versa, you should also keep in mind things that are done in the name of the Palestinian cause...by moderates and otherwise.