Rioting in France continues, but seemingly at a reduced pace. Three bombs killed 57 people in Amman. Our neighbors in Isaweea rioted at the gates of Hadassah-Mt Scopus Hospital. Shimon Peres has lost the leadership of the Labor Party.
We are following all of this from a family visit in the United States.
On the way to this stop I spoke to a small group of people, mostly right of center. One gave voice to the proposition that Iraq was a war pressed on the president by his Jewish advisors.
Politics is nothing if it is not dynamic. It is possible to construct explanations for what has happened until now. It is much riskier—intellectually—to speculate about what they mean for the near and distant future.
It is clear that our world is more than a bit muddy, chaotic, dangerous, and exciting. It may get worse before it gets better. More countries are going to have to face the issue of Islamic violence. For us, that is good; providing we do not get the blame. Sure, there were Jewish advisors who promoted the war in Iraq. But Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld are not Jewish. And they selected, and continued working with advisors who advocated the war.
The French and Germans may have been right about the whole enterprise. Saddam was contained. If the Europeans had their way, Iraq would probably not have become the nursery of ever more intense violence. But here we are. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and some Jews led us deeper into the swamp. Even the French, as well as Jordanians, Indonesians, Egyptians, and Saudis are sharing in the price. Politics does not necessarily concern itself with justice in its distribution of burdens.
Shimon Peres' defeat may be nothing more than the vulnerability of an old man—with a reputation as a political loser—against a skillful campaigner. Politics moves on. There is no tenure. Ariel Sharon might be vulnerable to the same process. At least for the moment, however, he did away with Benyamin Netanyahu. There will be others, but not necessarily before the next election.
It may get better, perhaps after it gets a bit worse. The lovers of peace will have to contend with the realists before they get power. Lots of Muslims see themselves suffering from what their brethren are doing. There is at least a small reason for a bit of optimism. Just how that optimism may play itself out, and when, is beyond the reach of political insight.
Posted by Ira Sharkansky at November 15, 2005 05:31 PMI have a strong feeling that Americans should Support American Interests ONLY. Any country we help should be as a result of their interests corresponding to our interests.
Whether allying ourselves with Israel is in our National interest is up for legitimate debate it bothers me that a Radio Talk Show host in this area is going to be getting a "Friend of Israel" award.
I would be bothered regardless of what country, be it a "Friend of Great Britain award" or whatever. Again, in foreign policy Americans should support what is in America's National interests, and everything should flow from that. Which means that if it is in America's interest to support Israel, then I am all for it, BUT if it isn't in America's interests, then I am willing to accept that as well.
But by accepting this "Friend of Israel" award, it means that this talk show host supports Israel regardless of whether it is in our national interest or not. He is looking at it fromt he wrong direction. He is looking at it from the perspective of "a friend of Israel", not from the perspective of supporting America's interests and helping other countries only if it serves America's best interests.
Kirby Wilbur kwilbur@fisherradio.com should be ashamed to accept the "American Jewish Congress Friend Of Israel Award" for it just says that he puts the interests of a foreign country ahead of America.
Look, I criticize naturalized citizens for doing this when it is them putting the interests of the country they came from ahead of that of their new country, America. Can I do any less for someone who was born and grew up in this country?
Posted by: Steve on November 18, 2005 09:03 PM