• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Has support for Israel become the new GOP litmus test? [W:249]

Has support for Israel become the new GOP litmus test?


  • Total voters
    41
Re: Has support for Israel become the new GOP litmus test?

Gaza has it's own elected government and is autonomous.

I think their chief export is hate.

Perhaps, but you didn't answer. If there's a state, how could Netanyahu promise what he promised?
 
Re: Has support for Israel become the new GOP litmus test?

It's probably about time to start asking if Obama is an anti-semite.

He is anti-Israel which is populated by Jews. On the other hand he does have many Jews working for him. Does he enjoy bossing Jews around or does he take their advise. Who knows.

Also how do you categorize the Jews who work for him as he tries to have Israel destroyed. My analogy is they are like the Jewish wardens in the camps during WWII. People like Axelrod and Lew are more loathsome (if that is possible) than Obama.
 
Re: Has support for Israel become the new GOP litmus test?

Every rightist of every empire loves their foreign rapist tiger.









One can't really blame the GOP in this regard. Israel is a fascist state that does the empires bidding. The logic of why it's supported then is rather easy to grasp.
 
Re: Has support for Israel become the new GOP litmus test?

Perhaps, but you didn't answer. If there's a state, how could Netanyahu promise what he promised?

Which promise are your asking about?
 
Re: Has support for Israel become the new GOP litmus test?

Israel is one of those places that goes miles out of its way to protect its people and prevent collateral damage. They do do it right. But, people that don't know only look at a still picture of civilian casualties and make wild assumptions.

Supporting Israel is a very good international affairs policy because they are a stabilizing force in the region. To withdraw support would lead to a regional war. With every regional war is the chance it could escalate into a world war. That would be a "man-made disaster" that would be devastating. So, as a righty that apparently loves every war ever (or so I've been told in this thread), the police actions that Israel takes to protect its people are not inherently evil and those that support Israel are preferred, but not required. So it is not a litmus test, but it should be part of a well rounded candidates platform.
 
Re: Has support for Israel become the new GOP litmus test?

Supporting Israel is a very good international affairs policy because they are a stabilizing force in the region. To withdraw support would lead to a regional war.
LOL youve got to be kidding. Isreal is causing most of the wars and conflict in that region since its founding.


"Every time anyone says that Israel is our only friend in the Middle East, I can't help but think that before Israel, we had no enemies in the Middle East."
-- John Sheehan, S.J.
 
Re: Has support for Israel become the new GOP litmus test?

What exactly is intelligent about opposing a two state solution? Israel does not want the Palestinians in their Jewish state. Do they actually think they can keep them in such wretched conditions perpetually. That notion is dumb as a bag of hammers.

What was stupid was opposing Mubarak and supporting the installation of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. What was stupid was supporting the rebels in Libya and removing Kadafi, turning the entire country into a radical Islamist stronghold. What was stupid was giving Russia the apprehend in Syria. What was stupid was a deal with Iran which allows them to enrich uranium and that is currently setting off an arms race in the Middle East between Sunni and Shia. What was stupid is trying to destroy our relationship with Israel, our only true ally in the Middle East.

Obama pointed to Yemen and an example of success in his policy of leading from behind. How's that working out. Obama's foreign policy is a disaster from which we will probably not recover. He's a ****ing idiot.
 
Re: Has support for Israel become the new GOP litmus test?

LOL youve got to be kidding. Isreal is causing most of the wars and conflict in that region since its founding.


"Every time anyone says that Israel is our only friend in the Middle East, I can't help but think that before Israel, we had no enemies in the Middle East."
-- John Sheehan, S.J.

Let me sum up how modern Israel was formed. Jews ran from Europe after Hitler destroyed their towns. They sought refuge in Jerusalem. They were rounded up, put in concentration camps (again) and even bombed. The UN stepped in and proposed a two state solution. The next day the surrounding countries attacked. So, while we didn't have enemies before Israel, we made enemies after Israel was formed because we didn't stand idly by and allow the persecution of Jews after WWII. So you can support the Arab states, but you are essentially supporting the antisemitism of the arab nations that want to kill jews just because they are jews. I'm betting you wouldn't knowingly do that.
 
Re: Has support for Israel become the new GOP litmus test?

It is a key interest of US Foreign Policy. Do you think that Arab countries do not see this as an Arab/Muslim interest?
And it does have ramifications throughout not only the Muslim world but the EU as well.
The EU is no longer towing the US line on the situation.

I think it's nonsense and that it will not have any effect on the US at all whatsoever, neither on the EU.
I think it's more a case of getting involved in a conflict rather than having an actual interest, of either the EU or of the US.
If anything it's a US interest that Israel prevails and that's pretty much all there is to it. Israel is the Western democracy that has economic and military ties with the US, and the US gets its oil from countries like Saudi Arabia regardless of Israel prevailing, so yeah.
And regarding stability it's even a bigger nonsense, since solving the issue will only solve the conflict with the least amount of bloodshed in the entire Mideast, and one that does not influence at all the other conflicts.
 
Re: Has support for Israel become the new GOP litmus test?

Let me sum up how modern Israel was formed. Jews ran from Europe after Hitler destroyed their towns. They sought refuge in Jerusalem. They were rounded up, put in concentration camps (again) and even bombed. The UN stepped in and proposed a two state solution. The next day the surrounding countries attacked. So, while we didn't have enemies before Israel, we made enemies after Israel was formed because we didn't stand idly by and allow the persecution of Jews after WWII. So you can support the Arab states, but you are essentially supporting the antisemitism of the arab nations that want to kill jews just because they are jews. I'm betting you wouldn't knowingly do that.

You're underestimating him.
 
Re: Has support for Israel become the new GOP litmus test?

LOL youve got to be kidding. Isreal is causing most of the wars and conflict in that region since its founding.


"Every time anyone says that Israel is our only friend in the Middle East, I can't help but think that before Israel, we had no enemies in the Middle East."
-- John Sheehan, S.J.



Before Israel?

The way I understand the region, there has been fighting there since the dawn of recorded history.

When did Moses arrive in Israel?

Are you saying that before then they didn't hate us?
 
Re: Has support for Israel become the new GOP litmus test?

What was stupid was opposing Mubarak and supporting the installation of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. What was stupid was supporting the rebels in Libya and removing Kadafi, turning the entire country into a radical Islamist stronghold. What was stupid was giving Russia the apprehend in Syria. What was stupid was a deal with Iran which allows them to enrich uranium and that is currently setting off an arms race in the Middle East between Sunni and Shia. What was stupid is trying to destroy our relationship with Israel, our only true ally in the Middle East.

Obama pointed to Yemen and an example of success in his policy of leading from behind. How's that working out. Obama's foreign policy is a disaster from which we will probably not recover. He's a ****ing idiot.




The Obama Administration has not backed away from that claim.

Is it possible that this is still considered to be a triumph of his policy because this is the result his policy is designed to create?

We may think he's failing because we assume he's working to achieve the goals that we hold. What if he's working toward a different set of goals entirely?

His foreign policy may be unpublished and entirely successful.
 
Re: Has support for Israel become the new GOP litmus test?

What James Baker said is the truth. The Israel was blocking the creation of a Palestinian state then, they are blocking it now.

Whether Israel had been, and is, blocking the creation of a Hamas state or not, there will be no peace for Israel, and that brings me to the reason for butting in.
Let us not forget the most significant bond between Israel and the US. We are hated by a large percentage of Muslims and t/o the world for various reasons. That alone makes us allies.
 
Re: Has support for Israel become the new GOP litmus test?

Which promise are your asking about?

His promise that there would be no Palestinian state on his watch.
 
Re: Has support for Israel become the new GOP litmus test?

His promise that there would be no Palestinian state on his watch.

What?!? You're telling me a politician is making comments designed solely to get votes? Astonishing!

Apparently, like an American politician, he was for it before he was against it before he was for it.

I think the topic and the comment were specifically on the West Bank area. In any event, that was a campaign comment that apparently was a popular one with the Israeli electorate.

He since has clarified the comment.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/20/w...tanyahu-elections-palestinian-state.html?_r=0
<snip>
Netanyahu said he had not intended to reverse his endorsement in a 2009 speech at Bar-Ilan University of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but only to say that it was impossible right now.

Continue reading the main story
RELATED COVERAGE
<snip>
 
Re: Has support for Israel become the new GOP litmus test?

What?!? You're telling me a politician is making comments designed solely to get votes? Astonishing!

Apparently, like an American politician, he was for it before he was against it before he was for it.

I think the topic and the comment were specifically on the West Bank area. In any event, that was a campaign comment that apparently was a popular one with the Israeli electorate.

He since has clarified the comment.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/20/w...tanyahu-elections-palestinian-state.html?_r=0
<snip>
Netanyahu said he had not intended to reverse his endorsement in a 2009 speech at Bar-Ilan University of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but only to say that it was impossible right now.

Continue reading the main story
RELATED COVERAGE
<snip>

If, however, there is a Palestinian state (as you assert), how exactly will he prevent one? If it already exists, there isn't much he can do.
 
Re: Has support for Israel become the new GOP litmus test?

As increasing numbers of Democrats follow Obama lock-step in perfect loyalty, Obama's pro Muslim/anti-Jewish stances increasingly are becoming fanatical, the more Democrats become antisemitic too.

Being pro-Israel is not becoming a Republican litmus test as Republicans' stance on Israel hasn't changed. Accordingly, the poll question is wrong.

The REAL poll question should be is being anti-Israel and antisemitic becoming the new Democrat litmus test?
 
Re: Has support for Israel become the new GOP litmus test?

Its been 7 decades since a major kill-off of Jews in the world, rather the slow killing of Jews here and there in the interim. As we see on the forum and from many - now increasingly Democrats in this country - there is a growing push to make elimination of a Jewish county possible by arguing why those who vow to destroy the tiny (very tiny) plot of Jewish land a radioactive death zone.

Few things in foreign policy infuriate some democrats than the fact that Israel having nuclear weapons and those vowing the total elimination of Jews not having them stopped those country's military attacks against Israel. If Iran can obtain nuclear weapons, Israel's nuclear deterrent is essentially eliminating again making Israel subject to military attack and invasion. This is the real agenda. Those who sob for Palestinians actually are sobbing there is a Jewish country still existing.
 
Re: Has support for Israel become the new GOP litmus test?

Yes, of course. And whoever denies that it's a US interests denies the fact that it's been a universal, though not unanimous, policy position for several decades. At least verbally, the US always supports the notion of self determination, and at least verbally, must denounce Palestinian oppression. But the US has a long and very documented history of supporting and utilizing dictators and authoritarian governments when it was good business, and conducting regime change when it wasn't. Worse, terrorist organizations have been the proxy as well, when beneficial. As Reagan's aide, William Odom said, the US's war on terror is hypocritical. Thankfully unconditional support for Israel is waning in recent years, and the GOP has apparently picked another loosing strategy.
 
Re: Has support for Israel become the new GOP litmus test?

As increasing numbers of Democrats follow Obama lock-step in perfect loyalty, Obama's pro Muslim/anti-Jewish stances increasingly are becoming fanatical, the more Democrats become antisemitic too.

Being pro-Israel is not becoming a Republican litmus test as Republicans' stance on Israel hasn't changed. Accordingly, the poll question is wrong.

The REAL poll question should be is being anti-Israel and antisemitic becoming the new Democrat litmus test?

There are 25 Jewish democrats in congress, 1 Jewish Republican in congress and one Bernie Sanders in Congress. Obama received the majority of the Jewish vote during his presidential election. Netanyahu speaks for Likud (and Shelly Adelson), not for the people of Israel and certainly not for all Jews. Opposing his idiot statements is simply a matter of good policy.
 
Re: Has support for Israel become the new GOP litmus test?

I think it's nonsense and that it will not have any effect on the US at all whatsoever, neither on the EU.
I think it's more a case of getting involved in a conflict rather than having an actual interest, of either the EU or of the US.
If anything it's a US interest that Israel prevails and that's pretty much all there is to it. Israel is the Western democracy that has economic and military ties with the US, and the US gets its oil from countries like Saudi Arabia regardless of Israel prevailing, so yeah.
And regarding stability it's even a bigger nonsense, since solving the issue will only solve the conflict with the least amount of bloodshed in the entire Mideast, and one that does not influence at all the other conflicts.

Why are EU countries cutting the diplomatic cord with the US on the 2 State Policy?
Because according to Bibi it will not happen.
So you will see more diplomatic relations between EU countries and Palestine- you will see selective trade sanctions imposed on Israel by EU countries.
You will see Palestine admitted to more UN committees –orgs.
You will eventually see a motion on the UN floor recognizing the State of Palestine.
Now Israel can get in front of the parade and provide direction, or follow at the end and be reactive.

If you think this is a not serious matter that does not impact the US and other countries, you are avoiding reality.

European Parliament passes motion in favor of Palestine recognition - Diplomacy and Defense - Israel News | Haaretz!

The European Parliament "supports in principle the recognition of Palestinian statehood and the two-state solution, and believes these should go hand in hand with the development of peace talks, which should be advanced," read the motion, whose phrasing reflected a compromise between various European parties.
The motion stressed that the European Parliament’s decision to recognize a Palestinian state is based on the fact that the Palestine Liberation Organization had recognized the State of Israel in 1993

General Assembly Votes Overwhelmingly to Accord Palestine

Voting by an overwhelming majority — 138 in favour to 9 against (Canada, Czech Republic, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Nauru, Panama, Palau, United States), with 41 abstentions — the General Assembly today accorded Palestine non-Member Observer State status in the United Nations.

International recognition of the State of Palestine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In order for a state to gain membership in the General Assembly, its application must have the support of two-thirds of member states with a prior recommendation for admission from the Security Council. This requires the absence of a veto from any the Security Council's five permanent members.[36] At the prospect of a veto from the United States, Palestinian leaders signalled they might opt instead for a more limited upgrade to "non-member state" status, which requires only a simple majority in the General Assembly but provides the Palestinians with the recognition they desire.
 
Re: Has support for Israel become the new GOP litmus test?

LOL youve got to be kidding. Isreal is causing most of the wars and conflict in that region since its founding.

"Every time anyone says that Israel is our only friend in the Middle East, I can't help but think that before Israel, we had no enemies in the Middle East."
-- John Sheehan, S.J.
The source of that 'quote' seems to be an article on Holocaust Denial website 'Institute for Historical Review'/IHR:
Is Israel Our Friend?
Posted on many anti-Israel/antisemitic websites.
And Of course, there were very few states in the M-E pre-WWII/Pre-WWI to be enemies with. It was all the Ottoman Empire until 1918.

Someone as curious as me:
The Debate Link: 05/05/2013 - 05/12/2013
With Friends Like These....

A Facebook friend, with the ever-so-wry "just sayin'", just posted a quote attributed to a certain Father John Sheehan, S.J.:

“Every time anyone says that Israel is our only friend in the Middle East, I can’t help but think that before Israel, we had no enemies in the Middle East.”​

As a pure statement of history, this is of course False. The U.S. has had its share of pre-1948 enemies in the Middle East (the Barbary Pirates, the Ottoman Empire in WWI, various Arab factions which sided with the Nazis in WWII, etc.).

But pushing beyond that, I think this statement needs to be unpacked a bit even if we took it at face value. The argument being made by our friendly Jesuit priest is that prior to Israel's establishment, we were all buddy-buddy with the dominant powers in the Middle East, but that all went to hell once the Jews had the temerity to establish their own state. Damn Jews.
[........]
After doing all this work, I got interested in the Provenance of the Quote itself and who this "Father John Sheehan" is. And that is a surprisingly difficult proposition. The quote shows up a lot on Google, but it is almost invariably Unsourced except to say "John Sheehan, S.J." The closest thing I've found to a source is a citation to Volume 21, No. 2, p. 34 (2002) of the Journal of Historical Review. The problem being that the Journal of Historical Review is the house journal of Holocaust-deniers -- it's a Conspiracy website with footnotes.

Meanwhile "John Sheehan" might as well be "John Doe" if you're thinking of generic name for a Jesuit Priest -- while that could just explain why it's so hard to find the particular "John Sheehan" who said it, it also might explain why there seemingly is no information of the :"John Sheehan" who supposedly said it.

The bottom line is that I think the quote is a hoax -- it flies around various anti-Zionist and anti-Semitic circles, but I don't think it's real.


This story does come with a happy ending though: I posted all of this (including my sense that the quote was Fake) on my friend's Facebook wall, and you know what she said? She thanked me for my sleuthing, admitted she had probably taken in, and resolved to be more careful next time (and affirmed that the quote did not express her views on the American/Israeli alliance, which she says should be preserved).
Hardly surprising to see 'anti-Israel' PoS post it.
Congrats PoS.
Last-word away PoS.
 
Last edited:
Re: Has support for Israel become the new GOP litmus test?

LOL youve got to be kidding. Isreal is causing most of the wars and conflict in that region since its founding.


"Every time anyone says that Israel is our only friend in the Middle East, I can't help but think that before Israel, we had no enemies in the Middle East."
-- John Sheehan, S.J.

If he didn't say that, he should have and could have. Certainly many US leaders at the time expressed their concerns about the creation of Israel, considered that it would run counter to US interests, would alienate the Muslim nations, and be an expense to the US. Many examples, similar to the one below, shortly after the States creation confirmed those concerns.

The Lavon Affair refers to a failed Israeli covert operation, code named Operation Susannah, conducted in Egypt in the Summer of 1954. As part of the false flag operation,[1] a group of Egyptian Jews were recruited by Israeli military intelligence to plant bombs inside Egyptian, American and British-owned civilian targets, cinemas, libraries and American educational centers. The bombs were timed to detonate several hours after closing time. The attacks were to be blamed on the Muslim Brotherhood, Egyptian Communists, "unspecified malcontents" or "local nationalists" with the aim of creating a climate of sufficient violence and instability to induce the British government to retain its occupying troops in Egypt's Suez Canal zone.[2]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavon_Affair
 
Re: Has support for Israel become the new GOP litmus test?

Why are EU countries cutting the diplomatic cord with the US on the 2 State Policy?
Because according to Bibi it will not happen.
So you will see more diplomatic relations between EU countries and Palestine- you will see selective trade sanctions imposed on Israel by EU countries.
You will see Palestine admitted to more UN committees –orgs.
You will eventually see a motion on the UN floor recognizing the State of Palestine.
Now Israel can get in front of the parade and provide direction, or follow at the end and be reactive.

If you think this is a not serious matter that does not impact the US and other countries, you are avoiding reality.

European Parliament passes motion in favor of Palestine recognition - Diplomacy and Defense - Israel News | Haaretz!



General Assembly Votes Overwhelmingly to Accord Palestine



International recognition of the State of Palestine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

First of all if you believe the fact that the UN, US and EU involve themselves tirelessly with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict somehow implies it is an interest of either the US or the EU then you couldn't be more wrong. Secondly the above involvement was the same in the recent what? 30 years? It isn't the result of Netanyahu's statement if that's what you're implying. And finally, the actions promoted in the international facilities of the United Nations are not in support of the two-states solution, which is the only possible solution, but of a unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state that is not the result of negotiations and thus will not lead to peace. These actions must always be rejected by the US and never will be accepted by Israel, and the only thing the people who promote these United Nations resolutions are really promoting is yet more bloodshed, not peace as they are either misled to believe or misleading others to believe in the case of the Palestinians themselves.

So no, solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not an American interest and not a European interest. It grants them absolutely nothing. An interest is something that benefits your nation, and since the Israeli-Palestinian conflict effects only Israel and the Palestinians then only these two must see peace as a national interest. It will not "bring stability to the entire Middle East" as the delusional would claim and it will not minimize the bloodshed in the region since the amount of people who die due to this conflict on a daily average is nothing compared to places like Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, etc. So once again the fact that European and American administrations pay great attention to this conflict does not mean it somehow became a national interest of theirs as you were falsely claiming, so next time you're about to claim I'm avoiding reality you should do a reality check with yourself, first.
 
Back
Top Bottom