Bush in Knesset Speech Calls Obama Foreign Policy ‘Delusion’ and ‘Appeasement’ « Tikun Olam-תיקון עולם: Make the World a Better Place

Bush in Knesset Speech Calls Obama Foreign Policy ‘Delusion’ and ‘Appeasement’

You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “Bush in Knesset Speech Calls Obama Foreign Policy ‘Delusion’ and ‘Appeasement’”.

Tags: Barack Obama, george-bush

This entry was posted on Thursday, May 15th, 2008 at 11:48 PM and is filed under Jews & Judaism, Mideast Peace, Politics & Society. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

47 Responses to “Bush in Knesset Speech Calls Obama Foreign Policy ‘Delusion’ and ‘Appeasement’”

Shul Candyman says:

May 16, 2008 at 2:14 AM

Good post. I thought it was so funny to hear Bush criticize Obama’s foreign policy. If Bush thinks it’s dumb, then you know it’s gotta be a great idea.

Don’t miss David Brooks’ article on this topic. He’s not an Obama fan, but this time he actually phoned the guy and guess what? Obama’s not so naive after all.

Reply
SimoHurtta says:

May 16, 2008 at 2:24 AM

It is astonishing that Palestinians agree that USA leads the peace process. USA’s situation is as an impartial a the twin sister of the wife would be the the referee in a family crisis. After Bush’s speech and frequent visits to his favourite country, it is strange that the Palestinians even want to speak with Bush’s regime. Maybe Palestinians should adapt the modern US foreign policy methods and not waste time in speaking with USA’s present regime.

By demanding United Nations not to use the word Nakba and erase it from UN’s lexicon is amusing and a world record in intellectual dishonesty. Especially for a country which has made from its own terrible catastrophe (Holocaust) a lucrative business and demanding a total monopoly to these kind of events in history. When many European countries have made Holocaust denial a crime, for fairness sake they should make also the denial of Nakba a crime. It would be interesting to see how Livni and others would react if Germany, Austria etc would make a crime of the denial of Nakba. Maybe some European parliamentarians should suggest this Nakba denial law.

Reply
LeaNder says:

May 16, 2008 at 4:48 AM

SimoHurtta, as a German I completely supported that Holocaust denial is considered a crime. The approach in the US made me aware, that it is much better to be able to watch it, than to push it underground. (Much more could be said about that …) It gives you the chance to debate it.

Apart from a very specific set of laws related to our Nazi past, the laws against instigation are not for a specified group: they can be used by any group or religion that feels something crosses a certain red line, just as libel isn’t allowed in some cases but not in others.

But still you can’t compare a perfectly organized death machine all over Europe with a fight over a small piece of land. I also have quite good idea of what it must have felt like for the people to consider the return to the places were they came from. As you have to always remember the time frame and its Zeitgeist in which the people in Israel fought over the land. As the space into which European Jews could flee was further and further away. Not all had the money to get legally into Israel. And everywhere else you could go, the numbers were restricted as in Palestine itself. Walter Benjamin killed himself in France since he got no ticket for the ship to the US. To select one of many, many examples.

If I hadn’t a huge sympathy for the Palestinians and their plight, I wouldn’t be here. And yes, I think Germans are partly responsible for the catastrophe of the Palestinans too. Simply watch the numbers of immgrants over the decades, especially after the Nazi’s seized power.

That said: Yes the whole story should be discussed from both sides, but one should be careful of doing the same thing the neocons and their friends do: Resort to the easy Nazi analogy.

Reply
LeaNder says:

May 16, 2008 at 4:54 AM

Sorry; I need a proof reader

Not all had the money to immigrate into countries like Switzerland (a certain amoung of money needed), Sweden, Britan, the US.

Reply
LeaNder says:

May 16, 2008 at 5:21 AM

Or I should keep my fingers off the keyboard, when I have no time to waste. Britain.

Reply
Norman Weinstein says:

May 16, 2008 at 7:19 AM

As our 51st state, as so seems a fait accompli in part achieved by our putative President, the Burning Bush, Israel will hopefully not assume that fiery role South Carolina played prior to our Civil War and lead us on to an even more destructive conflagration, although, like many in our administration and their philosophical enablers, the Neo-cons, Israel doesn’t seem especially reluctant about “taking out” Iran. And a secondary thought while I’m at it – TO HELL WITH IMPEACHMENT! Imprisonment for all these war-loving sonsofbitches whose death drives perforce might very well involve us all. Iprisonment, I say, in very deep dungeons where they can effect no further harm.

Reply
Bill Pearlman says:

May 16, 2008 at 7:21 AM

You know Rich try to step back from the naqba worship that Phil Weiss engages in for just a moment. The fact is that Hamas is to the south, Hezbollah is to the north and Iran is going to have the bomb. It’s inevitable. Jordan is always shaky and Syria might has well be Iran. Oil is $127 and the situation is no joke. The Democrats do advocate appeasement and if they didn’t Bush’s speech wouldn’t have struck such a nerve.

Reply
Bill Pearlman says:

May 16, 2008 at 7:24 AM

So Norm, if Iran hits Israel with the bomb, which they’ve threatened to do on more than a few occasions what would your response be?

Reply
LeaNder says:

May 16, 2008 at 7:51 AM

Pearlman, Iran will not hit Israel with a bomb. Also: How can it have threatened to do so, when it claims, it is only working on atomic energy for peaceful reasons?

No one would dare to attack Israel with anything different than with the Kassam missiles, for the simple reason they would be reduced to dust, Not only by Israel itself, but America and the whole Western world.

And you know it, Pearlman.

Mirrors: Do you know by the way, why the Nazis did not print the fake Protocols after 1940 (?)? They were aware that intelligent people would recognize them as their own plans.

Reply
Richard Silverstein says:

May 16, 2008 at 10:20 AM

@Bill Pearlman: Ah, yes. The old “enemies surround us on all sides, woe is us, the Arabs are out to get us” meme. Not very persuasive I’m afraid. There are legitimate grievances among all the parties you listed including Israel. As with all conflicts those grievances can be resolved through negotiation rather than circling the wagons as you advocate.

Iran is not nearly the threat you make it out to be. It has never said it would use a nuclear weapon, IF it got one, against Israel.

The only “appeasement” I see is your betrayal of the values of intelligence & good sense in writing about this conflict.

Nakba has a capital “N” Bill though I know it hurts you to admit this since it forces you to admit its not just a run of the mill event, but a singular one just like Israeli Independence Day is.

Reply
Richard Silverstein says:

May 16, 2008 at 10:21 AM

@Bill Pearlman: They have not. Prove it. Either you’re ignorant or a liar or both.

Reply
SimoHurtta says:

May 16, 2008 at 12:56 PM

Of course it is right to have a holocaust denial law. But it is as “stupid” to pretend that Holocaust never happened as pretending that Palestine was “empty” when Jews came and only little “bad things if any” happened. What happened in Germany doesn’t in any way justify what happened / happens in Palestine. Palestinians did not run Auschwitz of Dachau. If we use Holocaust as the “legal and moral” framework for establishing Israel, Israel should have been established in Bavaria (or some other Bundesland).

LeaNder it is not the question about the amount of dead in a “nations” catastrophe. Also Israel has created a very agressive and brutal military machine which holds a whole region in fear and brink of atomic war. Not to mention those millions under its occupation and exploitation. If we forget some absurd features in Nazi Germany’s ideology and behaviour, modern days Israel resembles in many ways Adolf’s Germany. Widespread unhealthy feeling of own superiority over the untermenschen, an extremely agressive and brutal “foreign policy” and no desire of solving problems using compromises. I do not claim that Israelis are Nazis. Far from that.But I claim in some many aspects of the Germany in the 30′s and Israel now have certain similarities. It is difficult to see any truth in the Israeli and US claims how Iran resembles Nazi Germany. Iran is as prepared militarily to a major war as Poland was in 1939. Israel on the other hand is as prepared and mentally ready as Germany was in 1939.

This Nabka denial by Israeli politician is natural because the are the ones “behind” the crime. But at least Israelis should be wise enough not to demand that the world is not allowed to use the word Nabka. Well in the way it good that those politicians in agressive tone demand UN not to use the “word”. In that way Nabka gets more publicity and understanding.

Reply
LeaNder says:

May 16, 2008 at 3:41 PM

OK, admittedly I may be a bit oversensitive concerning the excessive comparisons with Nazi/Hitler/Goebbels as rhetorical weapons. It’s a standard over here for whomever is considered the political enemy.

I completely agree with you, that the Palestinians weren’t guilty but somehow had to pay. I agree that it can’t be a question of numbers, And I have to admit that I resent much of the rationalizations. But still I think, it makes a difference when bureaucrats sit on their desks over calculations and decide that one bullet for each of the “Untermenschen” means that too much money is necessary to get rid of “the problem”. I spare you more precise desciptions, e.g. from my Cologne surroundings.

“Also Israel has created a very aggressive and brutal military machine which holds a whole region in fear and brink of atomic war.”

Before I heard about the Samson Option, I would have wiped this away, but I think the problem goes deeper. It is essentially a “Western” problem. Is there anything wrong with the US having atom bomb? France? Well, that is only for detention.

But can we trust Iran? But we see also that Iran could have a legitimate desire to keep the US armies at a distance since it is designated part of the Axis of Evil. Is this a creation for the US military complex after all, with Israel providing propagandistic aid? ( I don’t know, I ask you?)

Isn’t the core of the problem the dilemma Israel finds itself in NOW. With its special set of unsolved problems, and do we get to the core of these problems if we use a much an over used comparison, or does this comparison in fact buries the real problem beneath itself, due to its rhetorical power? Doesn’t it only serve to vent our anger and frustration? And isn’t the obvious reply to that: Why do you care so much about what the Israelis do, when it happens in fact all over the world?

Thus the use of these rhetorics only perpetrates a stale mate were we all are bored about the endless circle of affront and defense. We should get out of this vicious circle and it start with being more careful with words.

Wouldn’t you like to see a different discussion of the problem? Then start with yourself, don’t repeat the same standards all over again. The only way dissent will be heard is when it develops a language that can’t be easily discarded. I want to see a legitimate critique and not rhetorics that always have the taste of a simple reversal. Yes Israel does bad things, but it sits in a seemingly unsolvable dilemma. The only way to stop a catastrophe is to give them a chance to give up the strategy of the “Iron Wall”. (Power and Deterrence; at its peak the atom bomb) To move beyond an eternal confrontation with the “Arab Mind”. (see Fratricide in the Holy land, A psychoanalytic View of the Arab-Israeli Conflict, Avner Falk, 2004)

Let me pick the racist accusation. That’s both wrong and right. You could equally argue, that its a melting pot as far as Jews are concerned. True the problem is the sidelining of the law for Arab citizen, but is that racist or anti-Arabic. Can’t be anti-Arabic since there are “Oriental Jews” vs “Arab Israelis”.

Reply
LeaNder says:

May 16, 2008 at 3:46 PM

Do me a favor and simply read over the passages I have changed but not carefully looked at after. ;-)

Reply
Protesting Obama says:

May 16, 2008 at 5:43 PM

Obama and his supporter do not make sense.
================================
Mr. Obama has got a mini genocide on his hand already with his tacit support of Odinga.
Did Mr. Obama apologize to Kenya? I have not heard.
================================
He must be out of his mind to be even running for President.
================================
Mr. Obama is Peter’s proof. Even unqualified people can reach high offices.

Reply
Dinah says:

May 16, 2008 at 8:18 PM

[comment deleted for violation of comment rules]

Reply
Richard Silverstein says:

May 16, 2008 at 9:45 PM

@Protesting Obama:

Steven, you’ve outdone yrself for preposterous comments. Because Kenya is in the middle of fratricidal tribal conflict that’s Obama’s fault how? I’d say you must be out of yr own mind thinking this is a comment that makes any sense whatsoever. If you want to peddle Obamaphobia I wish you’d do so elsewhere.

Reply
SimoHurtta says:

May 17, 2008 at 12:14 AM

But can we trust Iran? But we see also that Iran could have a legitimate desire to keep the US armies at a distance since it is designated part of the Axis of Evil. Is this a creation for the US military complex after all, with Israel providing propagandistic aid? ( I don’t know, I ask you?)

LeaNder try to find from internet some facts about the Iranian military and military spending. You find that Iran’s army is purely defensive and poorly equipped. It has no means or equipment to attack neighbours or Israel. It only can retaliate with some few missile and guerilla strategy. The military realities are that for example Saudi Arabia used for its military $31.255 billion (2006), Iran $6.3 billion (2005) and Israel $18.7 billion (FY99). Iran uses to its military 3.5% (2005) of its GDP and Israel 9.4% (FY99). Iran is in population eight and in land area 78 times bigger than Israel.

Should we afraid of Iran and can we trust it? Well as much as we “wait from” Israel and Saudi Arabia. All three are religiously run countries, which do not fit “good” in the modern world.. The Iranian president and some priests make often stupid and agressive remarks, but so do Israeli politicians and priests. In the news Israeli and US politicians and military men are threatening Iran militarily tens of times more often than Iranians them. Israel and US speak even more or less directly of the possible usage of nuclear weapons, by them not Iran. The difference in rhetoric is that Iran is bulling without no real dangerous means, Israel and USA are bulling with a superior military power. I would be much more worried of Lieberman next year as a potential defence minister armed with hundreds of nukes, than of a future president of Iran who might after ten years have nuclear weapons. Naturally it would be best that the more or less religious “nuts” in Israel, Iran, USA, Saudi Arabia etc would not have nukes. But so long Israel has nukes so long the neighbours need nukes to balance the military and power imbalance. Sad but so it works.

Reply
LeaNder says:

May 17, 2008 at 3:12 AM

“LeaNder try to find from internet some facts about the Iranian military and military spending. ”

This is exactly what I mean. The threat is partly created (to be more precise: exaggerated), since this region is of utter geopolitical importance (there may be real fears, what exactly happened in Cheney’s energy task force?). But if you pick out Lieberman or Bush and the Neocons you have to realize that already Clinton was busy with an embargo, and partial bombing of Iraq. So Iraq had been a main target before. What changed after 911 is strategy. The world was presented with the Axis of Evil, for easy memorization, post 9/11. Strictly Israel and the most vicious Arabophobes would have preferred Iran from the very start. It may not be up to US military capacities, but it has an enormously young population and is bigger than Iraq. … As Iraq due to the long time efforts (UN inspection rumors of cia infiltration: embargo) was considered a: cake walk (and yes unfinished business).

During the Kosovo war, I was asked to translate an US Peace Now activist, a women, for a German audience. The war drums up to the Kosova war, the utterly strange “horse-shoe-encirclement” propaganda and “extensive Holocaust symbolism” finally forced itself into my consciousness. Some Social Democrats and Green’s had troubles to control their faces, presenting the tale. Before I simply didn’t want to know which groups were the most evil in the larger post communist Balkan conflict, As a complete nitwit in these activist circles, my preparation was mainly to read US newspapers. A standard argument, as I remember it, was that Europe had to “grow up”. To deal with its problems on its own. And to be able to do so, it had to enormously raise its defense spendings. It had to start to “clean up” on its own front doors.

What do you think was below this argument? The cold war was over and the US was re-orientating its “central spheres” of influence. But if I remember from that event, which is pretty long ago by now. In spite of this fact, the US defense budget raised constantly. For what, for whom? Has the US been ever attacked by anyone?

I am admittedly deeply puzzled, since I realize the military complex seems also a main motor of innovation. We somehow owe him the web. But strictly don’t the produced weapons sometimes need to be used, so new orders to fill the storehouses can arrive? Who exactly is in charge of US longtime strategical planning. Is this an open book? Always? Was the “democratization” perspective only a new strategy to solve old problems?

How about a chart of the military production plants in the US? Dependency of the economy on the diverse state levels on these companies. Dependencies with other companies. Work! Voting habits and representatives in both senate and congress concerning military spendings. And yes why not entanglements of the Israeli lobby and the US in this field with special attention on a new development in this field: Security, private companies. How does perception change if one looks at matter via this informations?

I think these are the forces the new left lobby, J-Street, confronts. And they may be partially “Jewish” but as far as they are enamored with power, they are very American. The close alliance with Israel offers a refreshing of the glory of WWII and yes that’s the point were Hitler and the Nazis enter the stage. And that may be the reason they surface again and again in the propoganda.

Sorry, Richard, that I leave one of my typical “associative meanderings” on your list. One of my central points of orientation is still the interview Condi Rice gave to DER SPIEGEL: After the cold war, everybody wondered who would be the next enemy now. Then 911 happened and everybody knew. And yes, I somehow added something in my mind, that the paper couldn’t convey: Pleasure.

But it was a pleasure to meet you SimoHurrta! Now I shut up again!

Reply
LeaNder says:

May 17, 2008 at 3:35 AM

Almost gone: looks funny: propoganda. ;-)

Actually Richard would make much more money in the field that is in charge of the tales for the public. Will netizens be able in the long run to push Public Relations slightly towards its utopia: dialogue? Beyond the tales for the sheeple?

Reply
Suzanne says:

May 17, 2008 at 4:00 AM

“It is the struggle of good vs. evil; God and the devil.”

So many have commented (justly) on Bush’s lack of understanding between dialogue and appeasement in his recent Knesset speech. I am surprised that that dog even hunts anything anymore it’s been so mis-used. Who swallows this? See the great letters to the editor in today’s NYT http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/17/opinion/l17bush.html?ref=opinion

Richard, re this quote above I lifted from yours- I was specifically looking for someone to comment on that one too- this business about being in a fight of good against evil which came across the airwaves in the same speech. You caught it too and it too deserves outrage of it’s own.

Don’t you get the sense that GWB has not learned a thing in all these years?

Thanks again for a good post, peacefully and thoughtfully laid out considering my own impetus to scream and pull my hair out. We are in a countdown…

Reply
Suzanne says:

May 17, 2008 at 4:18 AM

“Axis of Evil” – a fight of “Good [God] vs. Evil” = a license for endless war and killing. How much translation or spelling out of consequences do people need?

Reply
A.N. says:

May 17, 2008 at 6:35 AM

Actually, there was some Palestinian participation in the Holocaust. Hajj Amin el Husseini recruited three brigades of Bosnian Muslims for the Waffen SS. These were known as the Hanjar (Scimitar) brigades and participated in the extermination of Yugoslav Jews. Husseini provided a fatwa allowing this because Bosnian Imams did not want to produce the desired fatwa. Husseini fled from Palestine to prevent capture by the British. Even before the occupation, the Palestinian leadership supported the wrong side. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d51poygEXYU
In general, you are not a particular well wisher to Israel. Your love for Israel is conditional. If Israel follows your prescriptions, then it is fine, if she doesnt, she is worse than Iran, Myanmar, or Zimbabwe

Reply
Bill Pearlman says:

May 17, 2008 at 12:43 PM

You know Leander it’s quite fascinating to be lectured by a German on the evils of Israel. Perhaps you should wait until 2933, the end of the thousand year Reich before you go into the classic aryan mode.

Reply
A.N. says:

May 17, 2008 at 1:56 PM

Palestinians were active participants in the Holocaust. Hajj Amin el Husseini, the mufti of Jerusalem, recruited 3 brigades of Bosnian Muslims for the Waffen SS, the Hanjar (Scimitar) brigades. He did this because the Bosnian Imams would not issue a fatwa to kill Yugoslav Jews, so a Palestinian Imam obliged. Take into account this occurred decades before the so-called occupation.
Richard, your columns demonstrate that you are a conditional friend of Israel. As long as Israel follows the commandments of Richard Silverstein, handed down at Mt Sinai (Seattle), it is ok. If Israel doesnt follow your commandments, it is worse than Myanmar, Iran, and Zimbabwe. If you had to choose between the people of Israel or the readership of the Guardian, who would you choose?

Reply
dogktor says:

May 17, 2008 at 8:34 PM

I lived in Israel as a teen-ager during the Yom Kipur war. I was a kid, and knew nothing about politics and history, and I am just now beginning to learn both, but I know what it felt like to be attacked while the entire nation was vulnerable- fasting and praying.
Yet I can’t condone Israel’s mistreatment of Palestinians. Loving someone sometimes means letting them know when they are in the wrong rather than granting them absolute immunity. Since we are supposedly the chosen people, isn’t it up to us to set honorable humanistic examples? Is it possible to meet Israel’s security needs, while granting Palestinians the human rights that all people deserve? A perpetual war Bush/McCain style only benefits the military industrial complex, not the people of Israel, Palestine, Iraq, Iran or USA.

Reply
Richard Silverstein says:

May 17, 2008 at 10:09 PM

@Suzanne: The diff. bet. a good president and a dullard like Bush is the good president learns fr. his or her mistakes. The dullard keeps making the same mistakes over & over expecting that doing it the same way the 2nd time will somehow cause things to come out right. I think that’s also the definition of insanity.

Reply
Richard Silverstein says:

May 17, 2008 at 10:13 PM

@Bill Pearlman: Thanks for another tasteless & insulting comment violating my comment rules, Bill. Calling a German an “Aryan” is grounds for banning. I’ve done it at least 20 times & I’ll be only too happy to do it again. The next peep out of you & you’re toast.

Reply
Richard Silverstein says:

May 17, 2008 at 10:18 PM

@A.N.: This is pathetic. Jews and Arabs both offered to collaborate with the Nazis. You seem to conveniently forget that there were Jews so full of hate towards the British that they were willing to ally themselves with the Germans in the hope that they would help do away with the Mandate. Some Irish nationalists did the same. So what does this prove?

your columns demonstrate that you are a conditional friend of Israel.

Not at all. I am unconditional supporter of Israel, but not an unconditional supporter of its policies. That seems to be a nuance that is beyond your understanding. If you knew a bit more about the history of Zionism you’d realize that this is a time-honored tradition going all the way back to Ahad HaAm (& even farther back to the Prophets if you want to trace it that far back).

Reply
LeaNder says:

May 18, 2008 at 3:19 AM

Richard, don’t ban Bill Pearlman. He can’t insult me. Basically nobody can insult with my “Germanness”. I am immune to being called a Nazi by now. But concerning this special case: His rhetorical weapons aren’t very sharp. This may in fact have been only part of a “meta-exchange” between me and our dear misogynist Billy Boy.

Reply