David Corn has published the sequel to yesterday’s blockbuster video in which Mitt Romney acknowledges that pretty much everyone except his family and a bunch of vulture capitalists are shifty, layabouts looking for a big fat welfare check.
In the latest installment, Romney tells his Florida (and likely largely Jewish) audience that he doesn’t believe in a two-state solution, that Palestinians are shiftless, layabout terrorists waiting for the moment they can throw Israel into the sea.
While I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised at the abysmal ignorance Romney displays regarding basic facts of geography and history, it’s still remarkable to think how close a dunderhead like this could get to the White House. He not only swallows the most ludicrous tropes of the pro-Israel neocons (i.e. Hezbollah will release a dirty bomb in Chicago), he doesn’t even know where Iran’s eastern border is and places it somewhere in the vicinity of the West Bank:
…The Palestinians have no interest whatsoever in establishing peace…The pathway to peace is almost unthinkable to accomplish [sic]. Now why do I say that? Some might say, well, let’s let the Palestinians have the West Bank, and have security, and set up a separate nation for the Palestinians.
And then come a couple of thorny questions. And I don’t have a map here to look at the geography, but the border between Israel and the West Bank is obviously right there, right next to Tel Aviv, which is the financial capital, the industrial capital of Israel, the center of Israel. It’s…maybe seven miles from Tel Aviv to what would be the West Bank…The other side of the West Bank, the other side of what would be this new Palestinian state would either be Syria at one point, or Jordan. And of course the Iranians would want to do through the West Bank exactly what they did through Lebanon, what they did near Gaza. Which is that the Iranians would want to bring missiles and armament into the West Bank and potentially threaten Israel
So Israel of course would have to say, “That can’t happen. We’ve got to keep the Iranians from bringing weaponry into the West Bank.” Well, that means—who? The Israelis are going to patrol the border between Jordan, Syria, and this new Palestinian nation? Well, the Palestinians would say, “Uh, no way! We’re an independent country. You can’t, you know, guard our border with other Arab nations.”
And now how about the airport? How about flying into this Palestinian nation? Are we gonna allow military aircraft to come in and weaponry to come in? And if not, who’s going to keep it from coming in? Well, the Israelis. Well, the Palestinians are gonna say, “We’re not an independent nation if Israel is able to come in and tell us what can land in our airport.”
These are problems—these are very hard to solve, all right? And I look at the Palestinians not wanting to see peace anyway, for political purposes, committed to the destruction and elimination of Israel, and these thorny issues, and I say, “There’s just no way.” And so what you do is you say, “You move things along the best way you can.” You hope for some degree of stability, but you recognize that this is going to remain an unsolved problem.
We live with that in China and Taiwan. All right, we have a potentially volatile situation but we sort of live with it, and we kick the ball down the field and hope that ultimately, somehow, something will happen and resolve it. We don’t go to war to try and resolve it imminently. On the other hand, I got a call from a former secretary of state. I won’t mention which one it was, but this individual said to me, you know, I think there’s a prospect for a settlement between the Palestinians and the Israelis after the Palestinian elections. I said, “Really?” And, you know, his answer was, “Yes, I think there’s some prospect.” And I didn’t delve into it.
After saying all that, Romney emphasized that he was against applying any pressure on Israel: “The idea of pushing on the Israelis to give something up to get the Palestinians to act is the worst idea in the world.”
It should come as no surprise that a presidential candidate should be so cynical as to give up on the peace process. In essence, the erstwhile liberal candidate has done the same. They’re both kickin’ the can down the road. The only difference is that Romney was caught out saying it, while Obama’s too smart to be caught publicly doing so.
Since the majority of American Jews believe in a two state solution, the Republican has announced a policy that puts him squarely at odds with them. It leaves Romney in the company of the right-wing fat cat Jewish donors like Adelson and others who are delighted with this approach.
Romney made some additional embarrassing statements about Iran. Again, it’s simply frightening that someone this dumb can be a heartbeat and a few votes away from the presidency:
If I were Iran, if I were Iran—a crazed fanatic, I’d say let’s get a little fissile material to Hezbollah, have them carry it to Chicago or some other place, and then if anything goes wrong, or America starts acting up, we’ll just say, “Guess what? Unless you stand down, why, we’re going to let off a dirty bomb.” I mean this is where we have—where America could be held up and blackmailed by Iran, by the mullahs, by crazy people. So we really don’t have any option but to keep Iran from having a nuclear weapon.
As for Iran being “a crazed fanatic,” I’d say we’re awfully close to putting one in the White House. An ignorant crazed fanatic.