Breaking the Monopoly of the Mainstream (Conservative) Media
Caroline Glick, a senior editor at the Jerusalem Post and now the director of a new Israel defense project at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, blasts the mainstream conservative media for silencing critics of the so-called peace process:
Leading voices like former Jerusalem Post editor and Wall Street Journal editorial board member Bret Stephens, Commentary editors Norman Podhoretz and Neil Kozodoy, commentator Charles Krauthammer and Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol not only lined up to support the dangerous planned withdrawal. They barred all voices of opposition from the pages of their publications.
To greater and lesser degrees, their shunning of voices that warned against the Gaza withdrawal continues to this day.
So, too, with the exception of the Zionist Organization of America, every major American Jewish organization supported the withdrawal.
Like the editors of Commentary, the Weekly Standard and the Wall Street Journal, they barred voices of opposition from speaking to their groups.
All commentators who warned of the strategic calamity that would befall Israel in the aftermath of a withdrawal from Gaza were marginalized and demonized as extremists.
As Ms. Glick observes, the estimable Bret Stephens acknowledged on Tuesday that he was wrong to back the Gaza pullout. So did some other apologists for Ariel Sharon’s great blunder. That’s cold comfort, she explains, because the mainstream conservative media remains wrapped in illusions and implacably hostile to voices that challenge its illusions — notably the great illusion that “Muslim democracy” will solve the region’s problems. In fairness to Stephens, I should point out that his re-thinking is deep; he gave a tough and somber address to the Restoration Weekend last week, warning that Israel no longer can adjust its policies to the squeamishness of so-called world opinion.
There’s no negotiating with Hamas, Ms. Glick argues:
The other choice is to destroy Hamas. To accomplish this Israel will need to invade Gaza and remain in place. It will have to kill or imprison thousands of terrorists, send thousands more packing for Sinai, and then spend years patrolling the streets of Gaza and arresting terrorists just as it does today in Judea and Samaria.
Whereas the first option is impossible, the latter option is not currently viable. It isn’t viable because not enough people making the argument have the opportunity to publish their thoughts in leading publications. Most of those who might have the courage to voice this view fear that if they do, they will be denied an audience, or discredited as warmongers or extremists.
So they remain silent or impotently say that Israel shouldn’t agree to a cease-fire without mentioning what Israel’s other option is.
The millions of Israelis who opposed the withdrawal from Gaza do not seek personal vindication for being right. They didn’t warn against the withdrawal to advance their careers or make their lives easier. Indeed, their careers were uniformly harmed.
They did it because they were patriots. They felt it was their duty to warn their countrymen of the danger, hoping to avert the disaster we now face. They should be listened to now. And their voices should be empowered by those who shunned them, because only by listening to them will we develop the arguments and the legitimacy to do what needs to be done and stop fighting to lose, again and again and again.
The usual suspects cited by Caroline Glick cheered the so-called “Arab Spring” and supported the Obama administration’s betrayal of its leading Arab ally, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. A few wise old voices — notably that of Henry Kissinger — protested in vain. Now we have an Islamist dictatorship allied to Hamas. And the mainstream conservative media still can’t admit that Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood President Mohammed Morsi ran a transparent protection racket in connivance with Hamas. We still read everywhere that Morsi played a “positive” or “responsible” role, even after he assumed new dictatorial powers yesterday in what Egyptian democrats denounce as a coup.
The mainstream conservative media is too busy explaining why Barack Obama’s re-election had nothing to do with its own mistakes (it was Hurricane Sandy, Charles Krauthammer told the Restoration Weekend conference last Saturday night — just keep doing what we’re doing and we’ll win next time).
I have never met an Israeli who bought into the delusion of Muslim democracy. We should pay more attention to voices like Caroline Glick and less to the ideologues who got it wrong time after time. Ms. Glick, a former Israeli army officer, lives near Jerusalem and votes in Israeli elections. I live in the United States. She has a great deal more right to recommend risky and costly military solutions to Israel than do I. I don’t know whether she is right that Israel needs to invade Gaza and root out the terrorists, but I am sure that the arrogance and ideological uniformity of the mainstream conservative media is a big part of the problem.
Here in Germany these days several main stream media papers went bankrupt. Who wants to pay for that if you get cheap and better information per internet? Nobody!
And political parties here are very indifferent and there are none which are conservative anymore.
In case of newspapers you can go to the net, but what to do as a voter with parties you can´t need? All over the western world we have a kind of general suizide. But instead of that you have to be strong!!!
Frank, here in the US all of our once two and three newspaper towns have become one paper towns, always leftwing, and the ones surviving are disappearing. Now no more Newsweek, and good riddance that rag has been far and way wacky left for a number of years. I suspect the govt will step in to support some of the American Legacy newspapers like NYT and WP, but soon newspapers will be a thing of the past. Recently I re-tried the local paper the subscription was so cheap I decided why not, but it was so in the tank left I couldn’t even read it, I cancelled.
The liberal newspapers are collapsing because they were founded on false premises, that a “moderate” response to the French Revolution and then the Industrial Revolution would stave off the feared depredations of the labouring poor. You can’t get at truth through that route. I wrote about the dilemma of the corporatist liberals here: http://clarespark.com/2009/08/09/what-is-a-corporatist-liberal-and-why-should-they-frighten-us/.
May be we live in the same kind of society. At least we have the same kind of perception that politics is a little bit too much political correct and doesn´t take into account our concrete interests.
Thanks to Mr. Goldman and the marvellous internet we can discuss it here.
This article does half the job. The other half is to explain why Kristol, et al, behave this way. They’re Progressives.
Bill Kristol and the like have the same world-view as many Democrats. They are Progressive Socialists. Certainly, they are Nationalist Progressives, as opposed to the Internationalist Progressives like Hillary and the rest of the Obama Administration, but they are Progressives nonetheless.
It’s this Socialist-lite ideology that’s making excuses for Arabs Behaving Badly. It’s the same ideology that spits on the efforts of the Tea Party and joins in the left-wing chorus of “extremists” and “kooks”.
The Republican Party doesn’t need this group of establishmentarians and vacuous thinkers. I call them “vacuous”, because they believe they can talk about issues as if they exist within a vacuum. Events don’t have any effect on each other, and there’s never a need to worry about unintended consequences, because their intentions are so righteous and pure. Why, their intentions are to evolve the rest of us for our own good.
Everyone wants to be a better person, don’t they? Like the Russians, Arabs really want to be Westernized, right? For goodness sake, we don’t want to be labeled as racist or Islamophobic, do we? Then stop talking about Islamofascists. There is no Islamacist movement to implement Sharia Law across the face of the Earth and instill Islam as the theocratic government of the world. That’s all crazy talk.
People in the 3rd world hell-holes of the Middle East just want American educations, Levi jeans, rock’n roll and Budweiser products. Ask any one of them. They want to be democratic – uh, forget the fact that America is not a Democracy.
If we just appease the Arabs this time, they’ll like us and stop trying to kill us. They’ll eventually love us to death.
Jaycen,
the last two sentences are a little bit overoptimistic in my view.
The Tea Party deserves to be criticized for its anti-science views, though I agree with its concern over government spending. See http://clarespark.com/2012/11/25/the-tea-party-and-the-greens/.
Clare,
I actually found your blog prior to seeing your constant self-promotion on PJM. I find most of your articles are strained through the same Progressive filter as the one I just criticized. Your reply is another example.
I’m not anti-science. I have a strong background in Chemistry, Physics, Electronics, and Industrial Automation. It’s my background that tells me Evolution is mostly non-sense, as is the “Global Temperature-change Du Jur” of modern Malthusians.
Certainly, there are Tea Partiers who are anti-science, but the ratio of Tea Partiers with this problem is tiny compared to the anti-science Progressives. Everyone who told you to avoid talking on your cell phone while pumping gas, who told you the Ozone Layer was going to dissapate and fry us all with ultra-violate rays, who warns of Global Cooling/Warming/Something, and those who tell you human beings can be developed from random genetic mutations – regardless of where the mutations start – are all anti-science.
These people reject basic emperical evidence. They reject common sense, much less scientific objectivity. And then they get onto an alphabet soup media outlet, or onto the blogosphere, to tell me how anti-science I am.
Shove it. My problem isn’t science. My problem is freedom and your desire to take it from me. I don’t advocate that your freedoms should be lessened for my own convenience. Why would you do so to me?
Those last three paragraphs in my original post were sarcasm, for those who couldn’t tell.
the victory of ideology over reality is manifest across the entire political spectrum as this case illustrates
There is NO doubt left, the PC media (Israel’s leftist media/US media are twins separated at birth, equally dangerous)is anti-democratic. And it is their hegemony which wrecks disaster all over the world.
For if this was not the case, surely otherwise rational, highly intelligent, conservative thinkers would hardly have been afraid to raise their voices, against an anti-democratic putsch by Ariel Sharon. (for whatever reasons – and they are manifest – he did what he did)However, they were too terrified of the backlash, hence, their silence. Cowards. Tragic too.
And there is no better evidence of this than the following op-ed, originally published at The Jewish Press, reprinted at HONENU Legal Defense Organization (based in Jerusalem) – http://adinakutnicki.com/2012/06/22/the-bitter-fruits-of-disengagement/
This blogger would rest easier if Caroline Glick became our PM. She has more than the requisite military resume, academic bonafides, and moral fortitude to lead us during these extremely perilous times. A woman can dream…And Dr Martin Sherman should be her chief strategic adviser. Full disclosure:this blogger assists his efforts through his strategic policy center – Israeli Institute for Strategic Studies.
posters may be very interested in checking out http://www.martinsherman.net
The prescriptive strategic policies, found therein,are second to none. Click on the ‘head shots’ of the individuals who support the policy center’s endeavors. Read their profiles, as well as their endorsements. Self explanatory.
How long does it take to recognize that Oslo was a mirage?
Is it still true that Islamist maps of the middle east don’t include Israel ??
That happened years ago at the beginning of the second intifada.
Those Norwegians – so short-sighted!
We coulda warned them but NO! They just wouldn’t listen.
Failure to be open to alternative analysis is the curse of intelligence work. It’s especially regrettable if Commentary, WS, WSJ, etc. shutout keen analysts and ideological friends such as Ms. Glick. A responsible “B” team of analysts is always vital to have around (I guess you were around for to see President Reagan bring in Richard Pipes and company).
One can argue both ways on the 2005 w/draw from Gaza and on any plan to re-occupy it. It’s easy to conquer a million Arabs but no easy thing for a Western democracy to rule them. On the other hand, the tsuris of administering Gaza paid the dividend to Israel of allowing her to develop numerous human intel sources amongst the population.
Concerning the recent Gaza operation, its success can’t be completely assessed w/out access to classified information: 1. How much of the Hamas and associates’ long rocket range (LRR) force did Israel destroy? 2. how hard will it be for the bad guys to re-stock? 3. Did Israeli strikes in Sudan damage Hamas’ LRR production capability? 4. Did BHO’s reference to new counter-smuggling operations indicate actual new capabilities in that area? and, 5. What was the political and operational effect on Hamas of Israel killing some senior “military” leaders?
It is possible that this operation may have disrupted Hamas’ LRR capabilities for a period of several months and thus give Israel the ability to strike Iran w/less fear of retaliation from Gaza.
David – Your recent column (and a piece at Belmont Club which cited you) indicted how Israel, by affirming life, is essentially winning its decades long struggle as neighboring Arab societies fall apart. Every battle in a siege doesn’t have to be decisive. Sometimes it’s enough just to sortie and burn the enemies’ works and supplies.
Nimitz’s orders to Spruance before Midway were “rock ‘em and sock ‘em but don’t lose your shirt” That’s still good poker.
You know MarcH whatever our past clashes in comments threads, at least:
1) You are not SHOCKED, shocked that the Muslim Brotherhood forms the core of the Syrian rebellion.
2) Nor surprised that Egypt is being taken over by the MBO and that Morsi’s dream is to revive the old United Arab Republic that once fought Israel on two fronts with an MBO instead of Nasserist/Baathist drive.
3) You actually admit Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Pat Buchanan and Lew Rockwell are not all the same person. In fact they’ve been known to appear at different places at the same time. There is a certain will to power on the neocon (at root, sometimes Trotskyite when it comes to “more Colored Revolutions the better” Right which appears hellbent on defaming large swathes of American libertarians as unpatriotic if not treasonous. But you and I both know we didn’t grow up in an America where any President, regardless of petitions signed by 10,000 little worshippers of power (the topic of this post by Spengler), may strip anyone of their citizenship with the stroke of a pen in retaliation for a symbolic ‘secession’ petition.
There is a very troubling authoritarian streak on the rise in this country on both the so-called Left that worships Obama and the so-called Right that worships the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security.
At the rate things are going, at any rate MarcH, I for one am looking forward to the likes of Bret “Russia: Our Enemy” Stephens explain the next massive Russian order of Israeli armaments by the end of Obama’s 2nd term when he’s pissed off the Israelis one too many times and even D.C.’s ‘Rightists’ need to be reminded that they don’t own Israel. Not to get all Heartiste/Whiskey on everyone, but the D.C. attitude towards Israel seems to be that of a doddering and overweight fool with a young hot wife (Israel) who thinks she’ll never so much as look at another man. Ha! Israel was supposed to be our BFF in neocon land while Russia was enemy no. 1, how could BFFs get so cozy with enemy no. 1? No wonder as David joked the NY Post has to call Putin a world beating evil genius! It’s never D.C.’s fault of course for trying to run an empire with idiots unless it’s Obama’s.
Mr. X –I very much enjoy reading your posts and interacting with you.
“You actually admit Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Pat Buchanan and Lew Rockwell are not all the same person …” – Well, I might go there but I am still entertaining the theory that Rand Paul is the love-child of Lew Rockwell and Ayn Rand.
I never cared for the agency or agency-name, Department of Homeland Security and agree that the name carried a whiff of fascism. Perhaps I missed it but I don’t recall Washington, Lincoln or my elementary school teacher using the phrase “Homeland” to refer to the U.S.
MarcH — if nothing else you’ve at least put yours on the line for what you believe in Iraq or Afghanistan (forgive me if I don’t recall which one it was). That’s more than I can say for most of that never met a war they didn’t like crowd.
Thanks for your kind words about my modest service. It was actually both Iraq (2007 to 2009, N. Iraq and Baghdad) and (Afghanistan 2011, Regional Command East) but I should note that, although I did “outside of the wire” missions, and worked with a lot of locals on interesting missions, most U.S. 20 y.o. infantrymen experienced more risk in three months than I experienced in three years.
What really drives me a bit crazy is how their sacrifices were wasted in Iraq after 2009 and in Afghanistan in what candidate Obama called a “war of necessity”.
The Mainstream Conservative Media is basically no different than the left wing media. They just push their agenda to get peoples eyeballs and sell shampoo and deodorant. As you once said before, they will argue to the death that invading Iraq was a good move. They extol the virtues of that idiot George Bush, and they still harp on that abortion/birth control bandwagon. Kudos to Spengler for speaking up to those idiots. As i once said to you, you are a finance profession with a REAL day job. You dont need to be a muckraker to put food on your table. Not so with the rest of the mainstream media, BOTH left and right.
That being said, occupying Gaza is an idiotic idea. It costs TONS of money and eats away at the souls of the soldiers who have to deal with it. MOST Israelis I know were 100% behind the withdrawal from Gaza. Its cheaper and easier to bonb the living shit out of them when they act up You have no clue as to how hard the occupation is on the young soldiers who have to deal with it. Young Israelis are by and large a bunch of arrogant, exploitative, selfish assholes. If u maybe took a trip to Southeast Asia or South America as opposed to hanging out in the ivory towers of the universities and businesses you would realize this. Believe me, the last thing these young soldiers need is shepherd a bunch of hostile urban livestock in Gaza. It will turn the normal people into assholes and the assholes into war criminals. Pillar of Fire did the job well enough. No need to send boots on the ground.
what do you think of debka’s report that Israel agreed to the ceasefire because Obama pledged to deploy US troops to sinai to stop Iranian smuggling networks
Debka is always interesting but often very unreliable. I haven’t seen confirmation from any other source.
going around that Netanyahu was pressured by the US and had to agree to the cease fire because if not, the US would withhold resupplying armaments and spare parts to Israel?
Obama would never threaten Israel that way. He is a true friend of Israel and wishes her the best.
These options are left.
Beg Egypt to administer Gaza directly. Tell the MB that the Egyptian economy will be handsomely compensated.
Incorporate the Community acquis into the Israeli body of laws, subito. Europe, including Russia, is the only place left for the Israelis. Ironic.
There is one more. Gather up all the largest bulldozers in Israel – give the vermin in Gaza 3 days to evac – then begin scraping all of Gaza into Egypt. Move the perimeter fence to the Egypt/Israel border. Problem solved!
Paleo, if you skip the evacuation part, you have exactly what Hafez Assassin did in Hama in 1982. Also note there was basically no international repercussions from his action.
Oh I see there was a Freudian auto-correct there.
Maybe the withdrawal was a good move by Netanjahu.
As Jörg Lau wrote in the German weekly “Die Zeit”, Netanjahu reached his goals:
Israel demonstrated that its Missile Defence system works perfectly against intermediate range missiles and can even intercept small rockets. The threat of a devasting rocket shower by Hamas and Hisbollah looks less frightening while sitting in a working Iron Dome.
Furthermore, Israel chose the point of time and was able to put itself by the “legitimacy to defend” argument into good light in the world opinion.
And, as Mr Goldman has pointed out, Egypt’s standing has been strengthened, but importantly, on the expense of Iran. It wasn’t Iran saving Hamas from a devastating defeat, but Egypt.
In the long run, the question in Gaza and Lebanon will be should Hisbollah and Hamas risk their existence for an impotent master in Teheran? Even more, in the light of further extension of the missile defence, if all they do is to increase the Israeli budget deficit? Some open questions of the dangerousness of a strike on the Iranian nuclear program has been cleared in favour of Israel.
In this sense, I tend to see this as an Israeli victory.
For German speakers, here the link to Jörg Lau’s arcticle:
“Who won the Gaza war”
http://blog.zeit.de/joerglau/2012/11/23/wer-den-gaza-krieg-gewonnen-hat_5811
the article is unfortunately a long list of opinion and speculation. Obviously written before Morsy’s latest power-grab
Tell me if I am wrong?
Hamas has now the support of Egypt. Even a passive support (meaning, turning a blind eye to weapons transported across the Sinai to Gaza) is very dangerous because knowledge about it can be denied and will not create a conflict with the US.
Hamas has now the support of dissatisfied factions of Fatah in Jordan. Only the total destruction of Hamas could have eliminated this potential threat. Egypt would have no one to support and Fatah would have been silenced by the resolve of the Israeli government.
And there is the heavily armed Hezbollah in Lebanon which would probably think twice before attacking Israel. Hezbollah is now definitely emboldened.
And so is Turkey. She will have soon Patriot missiles, supposedly directed towards Syria but positioned in a way to cover airspace over Lebanon against IAF attacks.
I hope the Israeli government has anticipated this scenario and is prepared to fight against three sides simultaneously. Yet, I do believe that it would be easier, with Hamas out of the picture, to face a somewhat discouraged Hezbollah than three or four enemies, encouraged by the abort of the Gaza campaign.
Fred
You are NOT wrong. The Israelis, as usual, are playing for time in the hope that their adversaries will overreach. But they are watching themselves be encircled by radical Islamic fundamentalists, constantly rearmed by Iran. Their strategic situation is getting more and more perilous. Now within months, unless something is done, Iran could have nuclear weapons.
Let’s say it is a trade-off. It is better, if Hamas takes its commands from Cairo than from Teheran. Both are anti-Israel, but Iran might aquire soon a bomb and for reasons, Mr Goldman explained at length in his AsiaTimes-column, Iran is in demographic death trap and thus in aplocalyptic mood. The Muslim Brotherhood is comparably a smaller problem.
So, yes, this is vindicating Egypt’s position, but weakening Iran is of far more importance at this moment. Hamas and Hisbollah won’t follow Iran any more and Syria is in a mess. The Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood itself is waiting for Iran has been defeated to extend its influence further. Turkey is just barking, but cannot get involved in the bigger picture except hunting Kurdish Guerillas.
The Patriot batteries over Turkey are manned with NATO personnel (from Germany), so it won’t harm Israeli pilots. The mandate for the German soldiers foresees only allowance for combat actions for incidents in Turkish airspace.
SPIEGEL ONLINE – Politik – 22.11.2012 Türkei will volle Kontrolle über Patriot-Raketen “Patriots” würden da aufgestellt, wo es das Land wolle. “Der Drücker wird bei unserer Armee liegen.”
Wollen können sie viel.
So far, there is no finale mandate about this, but when it is a NATO deployment, the rules of engagement will be set by the sending army and led by NATO personal, like happened in previous NATO missions.
Who says Cairo and Tehran are fighting over custody of Hamas? Perhaps they are playing good cop, bad cop. Let’s say Iran has Hamas prick Israel’s skin, occupies Israel’s attention for a time (and away from Iran), and Iran gets a glimpse at Israel’s defenses. When it’s clear Iron Dome works, and nothing can be gained from further conflagration right now, Iran steps back and lets Egypt step in and “pick up all the pieces.” Morsi gets to play the responsible parent–as everyone wants to crown him. Remember that he doesn’t actually have to be responsible, i.e., shut down smuggling of weapons through the Sinai or encourage a two state solution, he just has to negotiate a cease fire, and he’ll be hailed as the next Sadat. He can tell Arabs he’s helped restore their pride (for which his price is the Egyptian judiciary) and he can tell Westerners he helped restore the calm (for which his price is $$).
BTW, the NATO Patriot (PAC-3) missiles have a range of only 45 km according to Wikipedia, so there is really no chance of harming Israeli jets.
Correct and no matter their (Hamas) idiotic “whistling past the graveyard” celebrations in Gaza after the ceasefire. Israel is seeming like less of a pushover and Iran a less desirable master.
Hunted by the ‘Jackals’ – Former CIA Case Officer, CIA Whistleblower Philip Agee (1995) – Part I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvZQa0hkfgw
“George Bush’s father came in as C.I.A. director the month following the Welch assassination. As director he presided over the agency as they mounted a campaign throughout western Europe trying to make me appear to be a security threat, a traitor, a Soviet agent, a Cuban agent. All those sorts of things which led to my expulsion from five different NATO countries in the late 1970′s. In fact it was in all based on lies, and to think that I was responsible for the death of any C.I.A. people for their exposures is absolutely false.
I don’t understand this argument, that Israel should do nation-building within Gaza? They gave that up with Oslo in 1993. Short of that, the pullout is understandable. Should Israel go back into Gaza and sort out the good Arabs from the bad Arabs? Talk about your neocolonialism.
The western canon is to use the western cannon.
Gaza may again become part of Egypt–like it was pre 1967. Preferably in a demilitarized way–althought that’s hard to imagine right now.
Carter’s Egyptian peace treaty is history. The Gaza strip is a pointing dagger to the throat. Remove the dagger by sending the population packing into the Sinai–the only issue is whether to do Teheran first. And Iron Dome doesn’t look that great with only a reported 20 percent kill rate, which means 80 percent of the incoming gets through.
In order to conserve resources, Iron dome only targets incoming rockets which are expected to land in populated areas. Since the palestenians are not renown for their competence in aiming (or much of anything really), most of their rockets are just sort of tilted toward the horizon and launched with the hope of hitting something and causing trouble. Relatively few actually cause any damage, and the percent that cause a fatality are very small. Of the rockets that iron dome considered enough of a threat to try and intercept, the kill rate was more like 90%.
Is the intellectual bankruptcy of the “Muslim democracy” project coming into clarity yet?
Hard to imagine a bigger oxymoron than “Muslim democracy”.
Caroline Glick cuts so refreshingly through the BS.
She and friends produced “We Con the World” around the flotilla incident
Look at the holdings of the media conglomerates at http://www.cjr.org/resources/ All the biggies are international. News is only one revenue stream. Included are TV entertainment and news channels, homogenized into pabulum. Add to that publishing, film and all the rest. Sure, they cover topics to hold a particular audience, sell the soap and such, but one can tell even more by which topics are never covered.
Honestly, I wouldn’t expect much bravery from these conglomerates. They are risk-adverse by nature.
And then will the terminally clueless put 2 and 2 together and understand that a Muslim majority European future isnt going to be pleasant for the indigenous Christians or Leftwingers? It certainly isnt going to be a liberal democracy.
I personally thought the Gaza pullout was a good thing. Why? because it would show the world that the only objective in the Arab world is to destroy Israel. Thus the world would know that you cannot negotiate with evil. It is sad the world has not payed attention.
a dangerous way to make a point.
the only ones who would acknowledge that point already know there can be no peace with the Arabs in Gaza.
And many people assured us that an Obama presidency might be a good thing in the long run because the dangers of putting a far-left ideologue in charge would become so obvious that we’d surely, absolutely, positively get a conservative president in 2012.
It’s risky to make policy on the basis of a predicted backlash rather than the likely near-term consequences.
“Is the intellectual bankruptcy of the “Muslim democracy” project coming into clarity yet?”
No, not really. It took decades for “Christian Democracy” to take hold in the U.S. And just as Americans overcame the intellectual bankruptcy of the KKK’s Christian terrorism, so too will Muslims overcome Al- Qaeda, the Brotherhood, Hamas, etc.
“No, not really. It took decades for “Christian Democracy” to take hold in the U.S.”
The US is not a Democracy nor should it be.
” And just as Americans overcame the intellectual bankruptcy of the KKK’s Christian terrorism, so ”
Nothing in Christianity allows for the KKK. White Christians cannot oppress Black Christians and still be their Brother’s in Christ.
Christians don’t burn crosses. They don’t bomb churches. Sure they claimed to be Christians but so what? I’ve got a strange neighborhood mendicant who claims to be Pope John Paul III.
Settlement by Jews and forcing the Arab Muslims out is the only long term solution, just as the Spaniard Christians did, in the Iberian Penninsula.
Clear em out.
The rising tide lifts all boats vs the crabs in a bucket.
The Palestinians are, as Newt Gingrich said, an invented people. Gaza may actually end up good for the Jewish people in the same way that Obama’s 2nd term may end up good for the future of this country. Good things might strangely emerge from crap. I suspect a fighting spirit is necessary for this to work, however.
“I have never met an Israeli who bought into the delusion of Muslim democracy.”
Just visit the Pentagon and you will find it’s almost a religion there.
But – do they really believe it, or are they just following orders?
Why should anyone at the Pentagon even *have* a position on “Muslim democracy”?
“That’s cold comfort, she explains, because the mainstream conservative media remains wrapped in illusions and implacably hostile to voices that challenge its illusions — notably the great illusion that “Muslim democracy” will solve the region’s problems.”
The belief that “Muslim democracy” will solve the region’s [Muslim Middle East's] problems goes way beyond an illusion. It is an malevolent stupidity that has morally murdered thousands of American troops in Iraq and Afcrapistan. These people are not conservatives at all. They don’t know the first thing about Ronald Reagan’s foreign policy principles.
A “two-state solution” that would work is to have a state of release and a state of quarantine, and all Muslims would be restricted to the later state, by whatever means necessary, for the rest of eternity, although I am reasonably confident that they would have all perished by each others hands long before that.
The problem with the Gaza disengagement is that nobody knows what Sharon had in mind in case it turns into what it is.
I think that breaking the monopoly of traditional MSM in Israel was Sheldon Adelson’s investment in Israel Hayom (distributed free and available electronically, in English too).
I’m not sure how large was the Israeli MSM’s role in convincing Israelis that “land for peace” is the only right solution (from Oslo on). It provided arguments for this notion, and mocked and silenced any dissenting voice. But more than creating opinion, it created consent and compliance: anyone arguing against this tradeoff was immediately labelled anti-peace/warmonger.
(With Haaretz that, for some unfounded reason, is supposed to reflect the country’s elite opinion and further creating the apartheid-occupation-colonization smearing labels/libels).
At any rate, Israelis are used to see their leadership
smearedcriticized on a daily basis by “we know better why you’re wrong” journos, and I’m far from sure they let such brainwashing affect their choices. Perhaps US conservatives are more sensible to, and rely more on, these opinions.re: “Is the intellectual bankruptcy of the “Muslim democracy” project coming into clarity yet?”
No, not really. It took decades for “Christian Democracy” to take hold in the U.S. And just as Americans overcame the intellectual bankruptcy of the KKK’s Christian terrorism, so too will Muslims overcome Al- Qaeda, the Brotherhood, Hamas, etc.
Except, as one person noted below, Christian democracy only took decades. It’s been over at least a century, if not more, since the Turks tried to establish a Muslim democracy, and it’s actually worsening.
Then again, I’m not too much of a fan of democracy anyways. France got a Democracy when they overthrew King Louis XVII, and you probably remember the mess that ensued (Robespierre, Soviet-style Christian and religious persecutions across the globe before the Soviets even came into existence, mass killings, etc, etc.). Essentially, Democracy is “mob rule.”
“Democracy” is an equivocal term. It can mean the rule of the many, in a regime which has the “rule of men” rather than the “rule of law.” This is mob rule, and is the typical definition of democracy among progressives, and in the examples you cite: the people’s will is the constitution. Democracy can also mean constitutional democracy, the rule of law in a nation which has accomplished the miracle of broad legitimacy for and submission to a constitution that embodies the rule of a just law. That broad legitimacy depends on a certain kind of culture that is very hard to make, very hard to sustain, and very hard to keep, and is the only soil for a just constitution. If the will of the people makes a just democracy, then Hamas and Egypt are just democracies. If a true democracy depends on a just constitution and just laws, then Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East.
The problems of lies and dependensy.Americans-Jews and non Jews whish less problems from the small noisy country and their sensere peace-oriented adwices were taken with the awaited gratitute from the responsible circles.But the weght of the errors and troubles grow with the help of the new president and Israeli`s voices are heard through the noise of the lies from both sides.Thanks to Ms Glick.
Because no one wants to admit that’s what they’re going to eventually have to do as well
Its very simple, really. There are only two things you can do with a mad dog. You can shoot the crazy s.o.b. dead, or you can let him go on his merry way knowing without a doubt he will continue to kill and destroy.
Islamic extremists are mad dogs. The only cure is a bullet in the head. We all need to grow up and deal with it.
I’ve often held that the first step to a lasting peace in the Middle East is for Israel to bulldoze Gaza flat then turn it into farmland.
You don’t negotiate with those trying to exterminate you and take your country for themselves. You eliminate them. That’s the harsh reality of the world and no one in this country has the guts to say it.
One doesn’t have to be so brutal. It’s much easier to set up an automatic missile response system such that every time a missile is fired from Gaza, an Israeli missile is fired at the launcher, by pre-announced policy. Of course, that means a lot of civilian casualties. The US should take the position that civilian casualties — however many there might be — are entirely the fault of Hamas.
Wouldn’t it be simpler, and cheaper, just to cut Gaza’s electricity. Leave the water flowing so not so many civilians would die. Most of them would flee to Sinai when their batteries run out. Not even Hamas could fight for long without electricity.
It’s my impression that the SOP of Hamas and similar group is to operate their improvised launchers remotely or via timers (http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/27/maos-rockets-and-the-eastern-afghan-border-war-part-ii/). Consequently, any IDF counter-battery fire would not hit terrorists but whatever civilians are nearby. Civilian casualties are certainly considered to be an asset by the Hamas leadership as they produce favorable international media coverage and more aid to embezzle.
Perhaps all of this continuous talk of avoiding civilian casualties and the euphemistic “collateral damage” with the use of “surgical” this-and-that tends to gloss over the essential horror of any war at all.
As one who remembers reading about Coventry, London, Hamburg, Frankfurt,Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki…among many others….”carpet bombing”…. as those cities were being destroyed by “blockbuster” bombs leading to the ultimate “atomic” bombs, I urge readers to remember that we were fighting then uniformed armies under formal declarations of war.
Now our Muslim enemy is in blue jeans and sports shirts, rides motorbikes and hurls bombs in markets, hides amidst civilians, launches their rockets from schoolyards. Mosques are rabble rousing propaganda centers….on and on. And the Pakistanis rail at our American drone-strikes in their sanctuary-areas?
Inhuman as it will sound, we must remind ourselves that we are now fighting an inhuman Muslim enemy, a Muslim enemy without our Western mind-wired qualms…..so if a one of our American drones creates “collateral damage” in such a nice sanctuary as Pakistan, how else do we fight this wide extension of what we used to call “guerrilla warfare”?
Why fight this continuing bloody war against this Muslim enemy of ours under Geneva Conventions which were drawn up using our Western mind-sets so long after we’d already experienced Muslim warfare at Poitiers/Tours and leading up to Vienna?, and the Iberian peninsula? Geneva Conventions are supposed to be civilly reciprocal, aren’t they?
This medieval Muslim type of warfare has been and is now being used against us with a good measure of success.
So, I’m arguing that we’re using anachronistic Western thinking against our inherently barbaric Muslim enemy who is taking successful advantage of a major propaganda opportunity.
What has happened to our “kill the enemy” wherever he will be found? ….just because he won’t wear a uniform? We’re being used.
You are absolutely right. The Geneva Convention never made any sense to me. Its distinction between military and civilians does not reflect reality. The presumption that civilians are nothing but benign bystanders is absurd. The records of history show that the worst atrocities on the Jewish population have been committed by civilians. The round-up in France, the Kristallnacht in Germany, the mass-murders in Hungary, Poland, Ukraine, Rumania, Lithuania and other Baltic states are already forgotten? I am not even mentioning the atrocities in Africa, India, Pakistan… When the ugly civilian mob raises its head, unrestrained by rules of engagement, the real killing begins. A civilian is a potential combatant and therefore an enemy and that is why even the Arab citizens of Israel have to be guarded with suspicion.
‘What has happened to our “kill the enemy” wherever he will be found? …. just because he won’t wear a uniform? We’re being used’.
Charlie, with all due respect, the reason why the COIN literature stresses the primacy of intelligence sources is just because the enemy is not uniformed. A strategy of near indiscriminate flattening of qa’alats, mosques, etc. dries up a lot of local human intelligence sources. The extreme alternative is the USSR strategy in Afghanistan of hosing down everything … that worked well. Also, there is the point that a precise, intelligence driven strike which picks out and kills the target amongst a sea of civilians overawes and humiliates the enemy. There is an old Spengler piece discussing the killing of former Hamas chieftain Sheik Yassin in Gaza that argues for that point (wish I could find it).
Note, my analysis only concerns “boots on the ground”, intel driven COIN campaigns such as Iraq 2007 and West Bank 2002.
Don’t misunderstand me, I’m in agreement with, “A strategy of near indiscriminate flattening of qa’alats, mosques, etc. dries up a lot of local human intelligence sources.” I’m also not in favor of “indiscriminate flattening”, although it used to get a message across that once one’s infrastructure was totally destroyed, there’s little point in fighting on suicidally, as the Japanese were certainly wont to do.
The key word is “indiscriminate”. Just where that line is drawn is another question altogether. Doctoral thesis material.
But, my vantage point of all of these years ,plus living as a civilian with Civil Air Transport and Air America all during the 1960′s in that nasty arena of South East Asia….albeit no more nasty than Central or West Asia….. just differing cultural attitudes, makes me a bit puzzled as to why after those massive, horrific Second World War examples I’d indicated earlier, we seem now to be so squeamish, veering off onto a wheel-spinning strategy.
Mind you, I would never relish making these appalling decisions, but as you present this, presumably the amateurish White House (is that not too long a leap?) decision has been made so strongly in favor of intelligence gathering that’s where we may just be passing up opportunities “to knock the living shit out of” our Muslim enemy, something perhaps in their barbaric mind-set, might just make an impression.
Apparently our massive destructive firepower is irrelevant in the new Muslim guerrilla warfare. But experienced military guys were not going off exactly indiscriminately.
After a decade fighting Muslims “whack-a-mole” style and the obvious failure of our altruistic “nation building” amongst Muslim primitives, certainly we can try another strategy.
As I said, I’m an “outsider”, completely out of all loops, unfortunately relying solely upon our biased “news media”…..and while I’m at it here I might add that too many authoritative, pompous statements are made by ostensibly “authoritative sources” who simply don’t know what they’re talking about.
I read some of these other blogs/comments and wonder just what’s happened to us as a Nation.
An important reason that the extreme measures of WWII now seem unacceptable is the rise of … conservatism, particularly social conservative beliefs in moral absolutes and natural law. That’s led to a renewal of Just War teaching, an important principle of which is that intentional targeting of non-combatants is never justified. Just War teaching also resists the easy statement that the enemy is “not human” and the lumping together of whole populations as beyond humanity including the children. I hate the Left and its media for never naming or acknowledging Jewish children killed by jihadists, but it would destroy Israel’s soul to practice the same contempt for the innocent displayed by their enemies. Israel knows that – it’s why the IDF has extremely careful rules of engagement as far as civilians are concerned. It’s not just external pressure that holds Israel back from mass destruction in Gaza, though it’s the antisemetic self-congratulating conceit of the jackass “international community” to believe that only their wise guidance prevents Israelis from becoming raving mass murderers. As Hitler supposedly observed, Jews invented conscience in the first place.
Charlie – my reference to “indiscriminate” is based on my belief that we do have allies and potential allies w/in the Muslim world from the tactical to the strategic level. I understand the frustration of you and other Americans but, even though I believe radical Muslims are our enemies, I don’t feel it helps to set the US up as the “enemy of all Muslims” by Dresden type bombings.
I agree with some points made by “Old Whig” and previously by our host that causing mass casualties among enemies populations can have the ricochet effect of destroying our home front morale.
To those who believe that Islam can coexist with democracy. During the last days of The Ottoman Empire The Turks start experimenting with democracy and they tried very hard to establish it during the 20th century. Here we are in the 21st century and The Turks sliding backwards toward Caliphate and Sharia. If the Turks who are relatively more westernized than other Muslims couldn’t do it in over 100 years. Do you really think The Afghans,The Iranians, The Egyptians or any other Muslim country is are capable to cross the bridge into 21st century.
Get Real please.
The Social Crisis in the US. The Figures are Staggering By Andre Damon Global Research, November 24, 2012
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-social-crisis-in-the-us-the-figures-are-staggering/5312854
“A few wise old voices — notably that of Henry Kissinger — protested in vain.”
Hosni Mubarak is 84 years old. No wise voice could have kept him in office.