Comments on: Perpetual Anxiety For Perpetual War

By: NauticalMongoose

NauticalMongoose — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 15:37:47 +0000

“Technically, of course, Israel is not and cannot be a US ally… that requires defined, internationally recognized borders.”

I have no idea what you’re talking about here. What does this have to do with alliances? It sounds like a ridiculous thing to assert, especially because Israel /does/ have an internationally recognized “border” at least on the West Bank (the 1948 armistice line).

And furthermore, whatever faults that the State of Israel possesses, it’s the only real democracy in the region. Rolling back American hegemony and maintaining even a token alliance with Israel are not mutually exclusive prospects.

By: gregpanfile

gregpanfile — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 08:43:12 +0000

Technically, of course, Israel is not and cannot be a US ally… that requires defined, internationally recognized borders. Somewhat ironic.

Underlying the Iran and other ridiculous warmongering agitation is the assumption that somehow ‘they’ will be cowed by bombing and not react as ‘we’ would, by resisting. This was believed by the Japanese, by the Allies, by the Americans several times, and every time, the ‘other’ reacted just like ‘us.’ More than ironic, ridiculous.

Besides the politicians, there is also the self-interest of the military-industrial complex and the media, plus all associated advertisers. Simply put, the more anxious the public is about anything, the more vulnerable they are to messages that purport to assuage them in some way, either directly (wage war, buy duct tape) or indirectly (vote for me, buy this product). This is becoming a cyclical phenomenon, where the anxiety leads to enervation and a scaling back until people recover enough to be whipped up again.

The entire relationship between the US and Israel is essentially irrational… based on emotions coming out of WW2, ethnic affinities of Balkan proportions, and cynical manipulation of religious beliefs in the conservative south… plus the innate corruption imposed by the relation between money (which is NOT speech… poor people can talk all they want, now can’t they, and rich people could express their opinions fully in any number of ways without spending a cent, couldn’t they?) and politics, all add up to a sorry state, that does not bode well for anyone.

By: Aaron

Aaron — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 08:02:16 +0000

Bret Stephens is an idiot, and there’s not much to say about this article. Just something in his defense, though, about the Wannsee thing: that was obviously a reference to Obama’s making that announcement on the anniversary of the invasion of Poland, more than a gratuitous Holocaust reference.

There is a grain of truth in Stephens’ lunatic fantasy, though. Some realists, Stephen Walt for one, warn that Israel should not take continued US support for granted. Walt has said that the US may dump Israel in the foreseeable future if Israel doesn’t act the way Walt thinks it should.

By: Daniel Larison

Daniel Larison — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 20:16:08 +0000

I think we have to give Stephens points for taking a merely ridiculous argument and turning it into something despicable and offensive.

By: Grumpy Old Man

Grumpy Old Man — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 19:11:34 +0000

Stephens’s piece is particularly crazy. Before I noticed the dates, I briefly considered that Obama had gotten some sense, somehow. But as the old Steve Martin character said, “Naaah!”

Stephens ends with the obligatory Hitler reference, a shameless exploitation of the dead for a political end.