Jewneric: A New Platform for the Jewish Voice

amen!

We don’t need that stinkin’ American money and haven’t for years, so please get off that. Most if not all of it goes back to buy American armaments and maintain American jobs. The Israeli economy happens to be exceptionally strong. No Israeli government is going to reject free money, so the initiative has to come from there, but we could do very well shopping around in France and China and other places for our armaments, and equally important selling our high-tech military goods without strings attached to US policy. This whole issue last came to a head in the early 90s when under American pressure we abandoned our fighter jet in development, the Lavi, and bought theirs. Later the Lavi in some form was sold to China and they love it and this caused wringing of hands in Washington. We fought the 67 war with no American armaments and can do it again.

As for the election, McCain is getting 70 per cent support here (National Post, Oct. 6) and among English-speakers it runs to 75 per cent (Jerusalem Post, Sept. 15.) We have to take out Iran’s nukes and we can be sure that McCain will be at our back. No one anywhere knows anything about who this man Obama is. Israelis don’t trust him as far as they can spit.

http://www.root-1.co.il/cynical.htm.

Look Idov. I am not saying Israel needs American money. I am very aware that she INS is speculated to be one of the strongest world currencies in the coming decade. What I am doing is responding to the argument in regards to US aid.

Secondly I don’t thing the Lavi was really the pinnacle of American pressure on Israel. I would say that …oh I don’t know the Oslo Accords would be a better example.

Thirdly. I don’t give a good GD damn if Israelis trust Obama. They don’t need to. They don’t need to.
What I am saying is that Israel is Israel and America is America and they each individually have their own issues that need to be dealt with.
So quit trying to influence my politics for the sake of your politics.

Zee,
You undermine your own argument when you point to Oslo as being a result of American pressure on Israel. To the extent that this is true (and I wouldn’t completely absolve Rabin and Peres from blame here), you are, in effect, if not in intent, affirming that the results of the US elections are of vital importance to Israel and should therefore be of paramount concern for those Jews who take Israel’s security seriously.

So your argument that we should be less concerned about the US President’s stances on Israel because “Israel is Israel and America is America and they each individually have their own issues that need to be dealt with” is really way off base. Yes, Israel has its own elections and internal politics, but whoever is the next Israeli PM, be it Tzipi Livni or Bibi Netanyahu, they will have to deal with the next US President and the amount of pressure he chooses to exert on the Jewish State. So while the “quit trying to influence my politics for the sake of your politics” line is a great “rhetorical flourish,” at the end of the day you must concede that American politics are going to affect Israeli politics — it’s just a question of how and to what extent. (To give another example, Bibi Netanyahu ran on an explicitly anti-Oslo platform the first time he was elected PM, and was helped in this election by the anti-Oslo Zu Artzeinu movement of Moshe Feiglin. Once elected, however, he caved to US pressure and continued on the disastrous path of Oslo, empowering the PA and signing away places like Hevron. Who the American President is is a game-changer for Israel.)

As for your argument about US aid to Israel, it’s a straw man argument you were making, even though it’s often made elsewhere and you were invoking it only to respond to it. The $2.5 billion or so that Israel receives from the US is less than 2% of its GDP — hardly a make-or-break scenario if such funding were cut off. And with that I will quote from a 1992 Jerusalem Post article about a confrontation Obama’s VP pick Joe Biden had with one of Israel’s greatest Prime Ministers, Menachem Begin, during the first Lebanon War:

“In a conversation with Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, after a sharp confrontation in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on the subject of the settlements, Begin defined himself as “a proud Jew who does not tremble with fear” when speaking with foreign statesmen.

During that committee hearing, at the height of the Lebanon War, Sen. John Biden (Delaware) had attacked Israeli settlements in Judea and Samaria and threatened that if Israel did not immediately cease this activity, the US would have to cut economic aid to Israel.

When the senator raised his voice and banged twice on the table with his fist, Begin commented to him: “This desk is designed for writing, not for fists. Don’t threaten us with slashing aid. Do you think that because the US lends us money it is entitled to impose on us what we must do? We are grateful for the assistance we have received, but we are not to be threatened. I am a proud Jew. Three thousand years of culture are behind me, and you will not frighten me with threats. Take note: we do not want a single soldier of yours to die for us.”

After the meeting, Sen. Moynihan approached Begin and praised him for his cutting reply. To which Begin answered with thanks, defining his stand against threats.”

Sadly, it is clear Israel’s leaders today would not take such a stand. Under an Obama administration though, we’d still have Joe Biden influencing policy towards Israel.

Tzioni

I am not going to lie your comment is waaaay to long to read in a single sitting and so I will respond (at the moment) to your opening line.

Yes I concede that Oslo is the result of Americas pressure on Israel ( over 10 years ago) as was the Lavi project (Over 20 years ago)

I am saying that we live in a different political landscape and further more the remedy is not to elect Israeli sympathetic Presidents (at what I feel is the expense of the country as a whole) but we need to have an Israel more resilient to the US’s liberal peace now douche baggary

“but we need to have an Israel more resilient to the US’s liberal peace now douche baggary”

Agreed, but we do not have a Menachem Begin at the helm (see the end of my last post). We have an Ehud Olmert, a Tzipi Livni, or a Bibi Netanyahu, all of whom would readily cave to US pressure.

The fact that Oslo was “over 10 years ago” is completely irrelevant. Since that time, the path of Oslo has been followed consistently — Wye, Hevron, Camp David, Annapolis, the “roadmap”…the list goes on. The “political landscape,” or rather the “land-for-peace” paradigm, has unfortunately not changed all that much. American pressure, especially from the Bush administration over the last few years has significantly influenced Israeli political decisions. Whereas even under an Oslo framework, prerequisites to a final status agreement included the Arabs actually cracking down on terrorism (as opposed to conducting it), compliance by the Arabs with such provisions of these agreements has become increasingly irrelevant under a Bush/Rice administration. This is not a Republican vs. Democrat issue. It’s an issue of who will pressure Israel to give more dangerous concessions, and by all indications (based on his advisers, his statements, and his personal associations) Obama would be significantly worse than McCain in this respect.

Zee, I love you.

israel doesn’t want american aid. there is an agreement with the u.s. about a staged decline in aid to israel for social and economic purposes. today it is practically nil. the only aid israel will receive in the future will be for military and defence purposes. this serves american interests just as much as it serves israeli (especially #3).

1. security interests- israel is an ally and faces military threat
2. Israel must buy from american companies, which is a way for the US to stimulate the economy through the back door.
3. economic- american firms have invested billions of dollars in israel. the aid given to israel is a fraction of the mount presently invested in israel via american pension funds, private equity investors, real estate companies, hedge funds, mutual funds, corporations (google, microsoft) (e.g. warren buffet invest 5 billion 2 years ago)
4. ideological- a shared set of western democratic values

i find it amusing how you respond to the criticism that jewneric is a “shill for the Obama campaign”
you tell us that you don’t like obama, but you still hope he wins.
wouldn’t this further buttress the aforementioned criticism. you don’t even like him, but you will still vote for him. i can only imagine the extent of your antipathy towards mccain.

EF

Again the issue of aid isn’t about whether Israel actually receives aid or not. its about responding to the argument I hear time and time again from people who still think its an issue.

1. If Israel faces an tangible military threat from a government (such as from Iran). The US will stand by Israel regardless of who is president. The greater issue is how much scrutiny will a President give Israel because of the way they deal with terrorism. As I said what Israel needs to do in this case is man up and do what they need to do regardless of US support.

2. Israel will continue to by from American companies no matter who is President

3. Companies who invest in Israel will also continue to do so regardless of who is President unless restrictions are created about business overseas. If that happens it won’t be about Israel. It will be about a little country you may have heard of named China. If Israel does the smart thing and elects Netanyahu in the upcoming election I am confident that the economic growth in Israel will be secure.

4. Anyone who knows anything about the social structure of Israeli society would know that to compare Republican ideology and values to Israels is ludicrous. Just because two groups share anopinion about how to deal with terrorism does not mean that they have a ” a shared set of western democratic values”.

Also I do not like Barak Obama…as a Presidential candidate. I would however probably vote for him again as my Senator. Also I never said I was voting for Obama even if I do want him to win. I vote in a state thats going blue regardless of my vote and so I think I will write in Michael Bloomberg who I would have liked to see run in this election.

EF I could have chosen to do the whole blogger thing and just say something like “Epic Fail” to your comment but I thought this would be more effective.

People I am going to say this one last time. Knock off the partisan douche baggary. Just because I dislike Obama as a presidential canidate does not mean I don’t believe in a set of ideals that at my core make me a Democrat and just because I am a Democrat doesn’t mean I don’t think John McCain would make a bad President.
At this point in time I happen to believe that an Obama administration would benefit the US more then a McCain administration

1. forced land compromises- jimmy carter= sinai, bill clinton= oslo, ronald reagan=? bush 1= ? bush 2= ? i wonder which fact pattern obama fits into.

2. agreed. the question is whether the president will enable opporuntities to buy good and many new and innovative products. obama’s decision to tax small businesses via ihis tax policies isn’t conducive. israelis can always buy from other markets.

3. they will indeed continue to invest so long as israel presents investors with good opportunities, however, they will not have as much to invest if obama follows through on his intention to increase tax burdens of businesses and investemtent funds such as VC’s (policies which he has supported in the last year. ). this will hurt the israeli hi-tech industry which accouts for a large percentage of israel’s exports and 7% of the GDP.

4. anyone who can compare “republican” with “israeli” has no understanding of israeli society. shas, likud, labour..i’ve yet to find consensus on any issue in israel (maybe at the abstract level)

there is nothing partisan about my perspective. i will not be voting in this election. neither candidate represents my views. i just think you are wrong. and you are proof that this site is, in fact, a shrill for the obama campaign.

Just as a question EF does this “1. forced land compromises- jimmy carter= sinai, bill clinton= oslo, ronald reagan=? bush 1= ? bush 2= ? i wonder which fact pattern obama fits into.” imply that you think Bush was worth having as a President because of his non involvement with trying to influence the middle east peace process?

the last two democrat presidents have only succeeded in narrowing israel’s borders, without any real peace accomplishments. the republicans haven’t been any more successful, but at least they haven’t forced israel to sacrfice territory without a real partner. the democrats seem more inclined to make isarel give land and then hope for the best. this approach will likely be continued with obama as he has been using dennis ross as an adviser on israel issues- ross wrote obama’s aipac address (ross was also the middle east coordinator for clinton)

bush was involved. just look at the number of visits by powell, rice, the quartet…not to mention visits by israeli and palestinian politicians to washington

i hope you don’t think that israel is the litmus test for bush’s success as a president. the economy, iraq, education… should probably be taken into consideration.