Barack Hussein Obama hates Jews, and is more than willing to sacrifice us and Israel on the altar of improved relations with Muslim countries around the world. At least that is the impression I got after reading the June 2010 issue of Commentary Magazine.
The magazine features 31 responses to the notion that “American Jews are facing an unprecedented political challenge, and at a crucial moment, with the need to address the existential threat to Israel—and by extension to the future of the Jewish people as a whole—from a potentially nuclear Iran. How will American Jews handle this challenge?”
Not so well, as it turns out. Most of the essays in Commentary exhibit a clear distain for the majority of American Jews, most of whom the writers claim are liberal, secular, Democratic fools who have no real love of Judaism or Israel and who (therefore?) voted for Obama in 2008.
No point in arguing with this assessment. Besides, it might even be true. My question is this: what would be different if George W. Bush were suddenly back in control?
Would W reverse Obama’s ending the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and blockade of Gaza? Would he put a stop to Obama’s forced moratorium on expanding Jewish settlements in the West Bank or building apartments for Jews in Arab East Jerusalem? Would he undo Obama’s peace plan, and dismantle the Palestinian State Obama helped establish? But wait a minute: Obama didn’t do any of these things. In fact, he hasn’t done anything at all. So what is the challenge here?
It seems to me that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu does just what he wants to do, regardless of what President Obama might want him to do. The only thing Obama has done is show the world just how powerless the US is when it comes to imposing its will on Israel (or Korea, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Venezuela, Mexico, BP, etc). President Obama’s only “sin” is airing his disagreements with Israel in public. His actual policies seem to be an extension of the previous administration’s policies.
But what I really don’t understand after reading the June issue of Commentary is just what the Unites States should be doing. Should we go to war with Iran? Should we use Israel as a surrogate military and have her go to war with Iran? Do we have the military capacity for a third front in the forever war against political Islam (the new catch-phrase of the day)? Just what would the commentators in Commentary have us do that we are not doing?
I don’t see any real difference in the actual policies of Presidents Bush and Obama. The United States is still addicted to oil and debt, still run by the rich for the rich, and still caught up in the madness of empire building.
Can somebody help me out here?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
You say: "The only thing Obama has done is show the world just how powerless the US is when it comes to imposing its will on Israel"
I don't think the US is powerless to impose its will on Israel - only if it tries to impose that will without any substantive repercussions. Meaning to say, what President Obama does or does not say pales in comparison to the millions of dollars of military aid that the US continues to send. Or the US's vetoing of UN resolutions on Israel's behalf.
When even the head of the Mossad is saying Israel is becoming a liability to the US, maybe it's time to give the folks at Commentary someing real to complain about.
There is some difference between Obama and Bush. Obama has set out what he would like Israel to do; Bush paid no attention to Israel. Obama's suggestions don't interest Netanyahu a whit, and Obama can't do anything about it.
Obama had some encouraging ideas about changing things in America, but he bent over one way or the other to accommodate Republicans and got screwed. Now he's even supported the horrible Blanche Lincoln (with Bill Clinton's help) and lost the support of the labor unions. Maybe a third party.
So yes, Rami, it is still addiction to oil, empire building, and the war of the very rich against everyone else. That hasn''t changed. And the US is so weak that neither Israel nor any Moslem country cares what the US government thinks.
As to Obama hating Jews, two words: Rahm Emanuel.
I agree with Drew - if the US were to discontinue aid to Israel, Israel would pay attention to US demands.
The US is "powerless" because US politicians are unwilling to rile AIPAC and the Jews who put tribe before conscience, and their allies on the Christian Right.
Why does the word "Jew" sound like a curse in this context? As a "Jew", who feels kind of ambivalent about this whole situation, I begin to see Netanyahu's position. It isn't "Israel" we talk about but those "Jews" who work for AIPAC who don't have a conscience. Maybe that's the kind of attitude that requires "Jews" to constantly look behind our backs, wondering who is going to stab us next. And that is what makes us go against the very principles of our faith and act like jerks. Maybe the problem with "Jews" is that since the Holocaust we have lost our "faith" in humanity. Collectively we don't trust anyone outside the tribe and with good reason. It just goes back to the other blog: What does it mean to be a "Jew" anyway? And how much are we willing to sell out on our ethics in order to be safe in this world?
Does Obama hate us? I'm wondering how much we hate ourselves.
Andrea: Great post!
Re Maybe the problem with "Jews" is that since the Holocaust we have lost our "faith" in humanity. Collectively we don't trust anyone outside the tribe and with good reason. It just goes back to the other blog: What does it mean to be a "Jew" anyway? And how much are we willing to sell out on our ethics in order to be safe in this world?
There certainly has been a lot of talk about "existential threats" to Israel and to Judaism these days. Some of these alleged "existential threats" seem pretty far out there to me--Iran, for example. Leave it to Commentary to come up with something as absurd as that! I don't see Iran as a real threat to Israel let alone to Judaism-- unless Israel is so foolish as to allow herself to get dragged into a proxy war on behalf of Saudi Arabia.
We have already proven we can survive the worst a hostile world has to throw at us, so the only real "existential threat" to Judaism would have to come from the inside. To me a real existential threat would be to allow the Alan Dershowitz/neocon types to talk us into the wholesale abandonment of our values for the sake of our perceived safety and even our perceived survival as a people. Our ethical values are our lifeline, and once we lose them we have basically lost our reason for being...in my never-humble opinion, of course.
--Linda
Hate is a strong word and implies emotion in politics. A good politician should be logical and look at the whole and not the section. While most blame US in desiring to "dominate" the world, it is only because the bastion of bankers that control the world want everyone to think that.
All of what is going on today, to me, is flames being fanned by those that want us to be preoccupied with earthly territorial matters while they rape the land.
If we followed our religions, we would all get along famously, with little need for politicians.
So, maybe the skirmishes in the middle east and else where have meaning to the local citizenry, but looking at the big picture, all I see is pain, death, poverty, hate and discontent. We are equally guilty of war mongering and I believe it is time to lay down arms and talk like human beings and discontinue dependance on US, because to do so will make us more dependent and over governed.
You may have Celiac but you can stomach a lot more than I. You wouldn't catch me dead reading Commentary. My blood pressure is high enough.
Post a Comment