Wednesday, September 12, 2012

Letter To Bibi

You are the ones who decided that you wanted to create your country in that neighborhood.
You KNEW that you were pissing off the neighbors in doing so.
Stop expecting the USA to kiss your ass and guarantee an existence that should be secured by yourselves.

You've relied upon the USA for your subsistence and existence far longer than is justifiable.
The time is long past to put on your Big Boy pants, do it yourself, and stop demanding shit from us... or get the fuck out of the region.

That is all.


Bike Bubba said...

I'd be all for ending foreign aid to Israel if we did the same to the PLO and opened up U.S. oilfields to exploration, so we wouldn't end up funding terrorism via the gas pump.

That said, a quiz: What do you call an Arab in the Middle East with the right to vote for political leaders of his choice, the right to worship according to his conscience, freedom of speech, and so on?

Answer: a citizen of Israel.

Brian said...

The most successful third party in American politics is the Likud..

Mr. D said...

The impression I get from the latest Bibi/Obama spat is that Bibi isn't looking for anything other than rules of engagement, or parameters, or some other clue concerning where Obama's head is at right now.

At bottom, I expect Israel to put on its big boy pants and deal with things as it sees fit because it can't trust the U.S. to give it a straight answer. So in that respect, it sounds like you and Bibi are eventually going to end up on the same page.

RW said...

An Arab with the right to vote for leaders of whose choice?


What a load of specious nonsense.
Arabs don't even have that in Arab countries, let alone Israel.

Brian said...

@Bubba--You do realize that the 3.7 million Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza are not citizens, and that "Israeli Arabs" are the 1.5 million that live in Israel proper, right? (Many of whom were generously offered Israeli citizenship after their land was annexed.) So let's not pretend that Israel is the great liberator of Arabs, shall we?

Gino said...

and dont also forget that Israel claims the west bank, golan and gaza as it right possession, a legit and REAL part of israel... whose inhabitants have no rights.

of course, if they do the 'one man, one vote' thing throughout all israel , the PM would be an arab. cant have that in a freely democratic country.

Bike Bubba said...

RW; there are Arab members in the Knesset. You bet Israeli Arabs vote for candidates of their choice.

Gino; there are multiple treaties whereby Israel renounces ownership of those areas.

Brian; 1.5 million free Palestinian Arabs in Israel is 1.5 million more free Palestinian Arabs than there are in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and Egypt. Why aren't the neighboring nations giving citizenship and rights to their Arab brothers, Brian? Why aren't they taking action when Hamas and such launch rocket attacks from hospitals and elementary schools, Brian?

And why should Israel give full rights to a group of people with a very, very strong subpopulation that advocates a new Holocaust? Why is Israel supposed to be uniquely suicidal among the world's nations?

Gino said...

when will they recognize the rights of those they drove away?

israel is a logical fallacy.

it drives out indigenous, and then acts upon right of ownership due to conquest...

and then claims to be not a conqueror, but a liberator.

when my good friend and co-worker (Marwan) is allowed to claim his inheritance property in Golan, then i will believe that Israel is being sincere.
if he was a jew, his claim would be recognized by Israel.
he is not. too bad, so sad...

Brian said...

I'm holding Israel to the standard it claims to set for itself, of being the lone democracy in the region. If you have to compare it to its autocratic neighbors, you lose.

RW said...

Ungrateful damn Arabs. The ones that haven't been thrown out of their homes got it made. What the hell else do they want, right?

Bike Bubba said...

Gentlemen, my take is very simple; I hold Israel and the PLO to the same standard. Israel is not spreading blood libels about the PLO; the PLO is putting the blood libel into children's programming.

Therefore, I tend to believe that the PLO's land and property claims are null and void until that kind of garbage stops. Israel is under no obligation to allow a few divisions of SS into their country, and that's what "right of return" would be.

RW said...

If Bubba were Palestinian he'd be complaining about how Yahudi wanted to take away his guns...

Gino said...

right to return means letting them have their properties, homes and farms returned to them.

yeah, but the numbers would be inconvenient for a self-claimed democracy.

RW said...

There are still, in my mind, legitimate questions about just how good a friend Israel is, which leads me to ask why we are so inclined to give them such a blank check. We can't have a party platform from any party that even so much as questions Israeli intent or policy. I have a hard time criticizing Israeli policy without the conversation descending into my supposed anti-semitism. And I, too, work with a Palestinian (he's 60) who had the experience of Israelis just walking in one day, kicking his family out of his house, and nothing more said.

I can't see why we ignore some incidents worthy of question. I'm not talking blatant, out-and-out acts of treachery on the part of Israel, but incidents that make you go hmmm.

Like the USS Liberty -

A Marine stationed in the Med. that is a friend of mine is certain they did it to jam radio surv. so Israel could clear out some civilian pockets. I don't know what the truth is, but it is open to question.

There also remain numerous questions relative to Israeli espionage activities over the years.

And this is an interesting article by, admittedly, not exactly a pro-israeli tank, but it raises valid questions anyway.

It makes me wonder why there is so much intransigence (which to me is the only MO left to the reactionary right in this country, exemplified by the commentators here on this site who can never be wrong, never be topped, and always have to get the last word) in regards to Israel.

I think a saner policy would be to actually become the honest broker. But I mean - REALLY the honest broker, not just a friend to Israel who is trying to deal with "their (and by inference, our) enemies."

What it comes down to, I think, is pure stubbornness on the part of the US gvt (of any party) relative to the region, that says that we made our call years ago, we're not changing our mind because it would make us appear weak or not fallible, and we're just all going to have to tough it out with no real answer to anything forever.

I can't understand why the same people who rail against "foreign influence and money" in our elections turn a blind eye to the millions of dollars the Israeli lobby invests in our candidates, and how all of a sudden this becomes okay.

I don't understand when being obtuse became a virtue. probably around the same time the words "compromise" and "diplomacy" and "pragmatism" became equivalents of piss, fuck and shit.

Gino said...

I think a saner policy would be to actually become the honest broker. But I mean - REALLY the honest broker, not just a friend to Israel who is trying to deal with "their (and by inference, our) enemies."

too late for that. no matter what solution we offer up, it will never be seen as legit/fair because we've acted as benefactor to one side for far too long. we pissed our credibility away.

Obama seems to be the only president in my lifetime that refuses to tilt to one side and tries to walk it down the middle.
(maybe Nixon, too, but i was too young to remember that.)

RW said...

The middle is death ground so long as the wingnuts are on the loose.

Bike Bubba said...

What is it with you guys that you cannot appreciate that 65 years of attempted genocide makes "right of return" a nonstarter there?

It doesn't mean that Israel has a blank check, or that everything they do is right. It simply means that issue #1--with no others coming remotely close in significance--for the discussion is "have the Palestinians renounced genocide as a political tool?"

That's the only even-handed policy; to stick with what's really important.

RW said...

What does "65 years of attempted genocide" mean? Do you mean the stated goal of the destruction of Israel in the founding PLO documents, or the tacit, unspoken goal being visited on Palestinians by the state of Israel over that time?

I need clarification there. Thanks.

Gino said...

"they suck more" is not a defense when you're the ones who claim to not do the things that 'they' do.