Bolton: ‘Pressure’ Is On Israel To Strike Iran Because NIE Made U.S. Attack ‘Highly Unlikely’
Bolton: ‘Pressure’ Is On Israel To Strike Iran Because NIE Made U.S. Attack ‘Highly Unlikely’
In December, after the new NIE on Iran was released, former US Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton established himself as one of the top hawks trying to undermine its credibility, going so far as to call for a congressional witch-hunt into anti-Bush “people in the intelligence community.”
During his trip to Israel this week for the the Herzliya Conference, Bolton has ratcheted up his criticisms of the report, saying on Sunday that the “illegitimate politicization” of the NIE was “a quasi-coup by the intelligence services.”
On Monday, Bolton said that the NIE put “pressure” on Israel to strike Iran because “the likelihood of American use of force has been dramatically reduced”:
“One can say with some assurance that in the next year the use of force by the United States is highly unlikely,” Bolton told AFP on the sidelines of the Herzliya conference on the balance of Israel’s national security.
“That increases the pressure on Israel in that period of time… if it feels Iran is on the verge of acquiring that capability, it brings the decision point home to use force,” he said.
Reacting to Bolton, a “senior Israeli security official” told Agence France-Presse that “one should listen very closely to what Bolton has to say.”
Asked about Bolton’s comments today, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice refused to refute him, only saying that Bolton is “a private citizen”:
QUESTION: (Inaudible) on Israel and he basically told us (inaudible) because they said the Bush administration (inaudible).
RICE: John Bolton is a private citizen. He can say what he wants.
Bolton’s comments join a chorus of conservative hawks who continue to argue, in the words of National Review’s Mark Steyn, that a “the bombing option is becoming the only one that will be left” in regards to Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
76 Responses to “Bolton: ‘Pressure’ Is On Israel To Strike Iran Because NIE Made U.S. Attack ‘Highly Unlikely’”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
On Monday, Bolton said that the NIE put “pressure†on Israel to strike Iran because “the likelihood of American use of force has been dramatically reducedâ€:
Premise:
Iran must be nuked.
Problem:
NIE has made it unlikely current administration can get away with it.
Solution:
Have the Israelis do it.
False premises, false solutions.
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:36 pmBolton is a defective human being.
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:37 pmPrivate citizen?
Who the f_ck paid to own that?
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:39 pmAnd once Israel makes a move, then the US would have to join in to support such a valuable ally….
its going to happen whether we want it to or not…
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:39 pmSo rather than working with-in a particular frame-work to sort out problems/differences , the ’solution’ is to blow everyone up/kill ‘em all …….
Wally Walrus there needs to shut the hell up.
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:40 pmCould someone please dye this MOFO’s hair white to match his lip broom?
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:40 pmWhy are the ramblings of this idiot not annotated with the facts? His continued lack of bowel control should be noted first. Label him as a likely lunatic first, or simply link to his statements of fact. That would conflict enough with reality for the world to ignore him.
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:41 pmIf we ignore him, he will implode. His ego will see to that instantly.
The only way Iran is attacked is that Russia and China make a deal with US and Israel to own some of the natural gas. Remember 15% of all natural gas is under Iran.
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:45 pmIf Israel attacks Iran without provocation, I hope ALL the Persians, Arabs, etc.
take OUT Israel.
If Israelis want PEACE, they can have it.
Or OBLITERATION, which will be deserved if they attack Iran without cause.
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:45 pmwarmongering pshycopath.
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:46 pmHere let me fix this for Bolton.
Because NIE Made U.S. Attack ‘Highly UNNECESSARY’
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:46 pmhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp-dyn/ content/ article/ 2005/ 07/ 12/ AR2005071201546_pf.html
snip…
“No matter if it’s rogue’s oil or a friend’s oil, we don’t care,” said an energy adviser to the central government who spoke on the condition he not be identified, citing the threat of government disciplinary action. “Human rights? We don’t care. We care about oil. Whether Iran would have nuclear weapons or not is not our business. America cares, but Iran is not our neighbor. Anyone who helps China with energy is a friend.”
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:48 pmThis was the plan all along, to have Israel start the fight.
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:48 pmOr OBLITERATION, which will be deserved if they attack Iran without cause.
Comment by Arn Gunnutes
Why wait?
Why wouldn’t Israel deserve punishment after violating every UN resolution, and the Geneva Convention?
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:48 pm“That increases the pressure on Israel in that period of time…”
And that pressure is coming from the Slim Pickens of diplomacy and the “man” Jon Stewart calls the “Shaggy DA,” John Bolton.
Also, still no information from TP on the war crimes in the Gaza Strip.
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:49 pmI really used to like Wilford Brimley too until he came back from that science station in Antarctica. He was never quite the same. Now he just moans over and over about attacking Iran.
I think this guy says Iran more than Rudy says 9-11.
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:50 pmWhy wouldn’t Israel deserve punishment after violating every UN resolution, and the Geneva Convention?
Comment by Juan C. — January 22, 2008 @ 2:48 pm
They’ve gotten away with it since 1948. Why start enforcing the resolutions now?
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:51 pmLefty, “I really used to like Wilford Brimley too until he came back from that science station in Antarctica. He was never quite the same.”
Clever reference to “John Carpenter’s The Thing.”
Impressive.
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:53 pmAnd what if Iran attacks Israel without provocation? Using your logic, Arn, would that be grounds for Israel and its allies to attack “ALL the Persians, Arabs, etc….†(using your words)?
Comment by good_golly
Well, first of all, after Israel rethoric, it wouldn’t be WITHOUT PROVOCATION.
And second, Israel would have to ask the Security Council of the UN to condemn Iran’s aggression, it would have the right to defend itself and then the SC would have to send peace forces. But, hey, it would be really ironic for Israel to do the right thing when it has done exactly what you think Iran could do.
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:53 pmThank you sir.
Doesn’t it seem like this guy is possessed by something that just wants to kill? Maybe it’s just me.
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:54 pmWe can only hope that we get through this year without another mass-murder of women and children in the Middle east. Next January, sane Americans and the rest of the world will breath a collective sigh of relief when we swear in Obama, Clinton or Edwards as the next president and throw these psycopathic bums out for good.
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:55 pm#9. And what if Iran attacks Israel without provocation? Using your logic, Arn, would that be grounds for Israel and its allies to attack “ALL the Persians, Arabs, etc….†(using your words)?
Comment by good_golly — January 22, 2008 @ 2:49 pm
If Iran attacked Israel without provocation, Israel would respond to Iran with its nuclear arsenal and its brand new ballistic missiles.
Fortunately for the people of Iran, Iran is not run by morons and they will not attack Israel. They don’t have the capability and they don’t have the motivation.
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:55 pmdoesn’t seem possible for a neocon to envision a world without war. The choices in the neocon vision [cough] are limited to:
war, or
war
(bloodthirsty animals. neocons are in desperate need of conflict resolution therapy and self-awareness training. And we’re desperate for them to get it. Won’t some professionals donate their time to saving humanity from the neocons?)
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:56 pm.
Russia….get your nukes ready.
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:56 pm“Clever reference to “John Carpenter’s The Thing.—
One of the scariest and creepiest SciFi movies of all time. Almost as scary as these psychopathic maniacs running the Bush foreign policy.
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:57 pmBolt-on prays to the mustache fairy every night, in hopes someone will attack Iran.
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:57 pmdoesn’t seem possible for a neocon to envision a world without war. The choices in the neocon vision [cough] are limited to:
war, or
war
Comment by pluege — January 22, 2008 @ 2:56 pm
The profit margins on peace are slim at best. Defense industry contractors have families to support, you know!
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:57 pmOff Topic:
Mozilla has introduced a “Bush countdown timer†as a Firefox extension.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/3792
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:59 pmNext January, sane Americans and the rest of the world will breath a collective sigh of relief when we swear in Obama, Clinton or Edwards as the next president and throw these psycopathic bums out for good.
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper
I know you know that I doubt it.
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:59 pmOne of the scariest and creepiest SciFi movies of all time. Almost as scary as these psychopathic maniacs running the Bush foreign policy.
I watched it recently for the first time in ages. Really holds up well. The scary part is the psychological tension. That makes the film.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:00 pmSure, get Israel to do our dirty work for us and then when Iran strikes back, we will have to go to the rescue of our poor ally Israel (actually the country that rules our political process).
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:01 pm“One of the scariest and creepiest SciFi movies of all time.”
“Really holds up well. The scary part is the psychological tension.”
Agreed…Underrated when first released in 1982, I think people are beginning to recognize it as a masterpiece….
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:03 pmSure, get Israel to do our dirty work for us and then when Iran strikes back, we will have to go to the rescue of our poor ally Israel (actually the country that rules our political process).
Comment by bilbobaggins
Sounds like Vietnam, but with David instead of Asterix.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:06 pmGee Bolt-on,
God forbid they (Israel) have to defend themselves?!
They have nukes, and one of the best trained military in the world.
Allow them to remain our puppet/target of US hatred in the ME.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:07 pmAnd what’s wrong with that! If Israel wants Iran attacked, why shouldn’t they do it themselves rather than expect us to do it for them! Joe Lieberman be damned along with Bolten and all those other crazy neocons!
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:12 pmI will go out on a limb here and say that the world would be a much more peaceful and safer place if Israel ceased to exist.
Comment by bilbobaggins
I disagree. Another bunch of morons would make wars unnecessarily.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:14 pmI will go out on a limb here and say that the world would be a much more peaceful and safer place if Israel ceased to exist.
Comment by bilbobaggins — January 22, 2008 @ 3:07 pm
I doubt that. If anything, Israel gives Arab leaders something they can agree on. If Israel were to cease to exist immediately, the conflict in the Levant would shift to issues of land and watershed management among all the other Arab countries. There are also some strong opposition voices in Israel that want to end the occupation.
Perhaps a more accurate hypothetical would be to say that the world would be a much more peaceful and safer place if the neocons in the U.S., Israel, and the Arab world ceased to exist.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:15 pmDoesn’t it seem like this guy is possessed by something that just wants to kill? Maybe it’s just me.
Comment by lefty — January 22, 2008 @ 2:54 pm
Teah he’s possessed by the military/industrial complex that makes bigger profits when there’s a war going on.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:16 pmIt is ILLEGAL to promote offensive first use of nuclear weapons.
Comment by plunger — January 22, 2008 @ 3:16 pm
Illegal? No. Insane? Definitely.
Bolton should be locked in a padded cell for his own protection.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:18 pmAnd what’s wrong with that! If Israel wants Iran attacked, why shouldn’t they do it themselves rather than expect us to do it for them! Joe Lieberman be damned along with Bolten and all those other crazy neocons!
Comment by Tigris Lily
I would have no problem with it if the US stayed out of it. But you know very well that if Israel attacked Iran and than Iran fought back, we would have go to in and defend of ally Israel and join in the attack. That is actually the plan. Since Bush can no longer do it because of the NIE, they are trying to get Israel to do it for us. I hope they are not that stupid, but if they are, then the hell with them. I hope Congress will not allow Bush to get involved if Israel starts a fight with Iran.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:18 pmBolton should be locked in a padded cell for his own protection.
Comment by toasterhead — January 22, 2008 @ 3:18 pm
Bolton should be locked in a padded cell for OUR protection.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:19 pmPerhaps a more accurate hypothetical would be to say that the world would be a much more peaceful and safer place if the neocons in the U.S., Israel, and the Arab world ceased to exist.
Comment by toasterhead
Ok, I’ll agree with that one. Actually the world would be a more peaceful and safer place if the Bush Crime Family ceased to exist.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:20 pm#9. And what if Iran attacks Israel without provocation? Using your logic, Arn, would that be grounds for Israel and its allies to attack “ALL the Persians, Arabs, etc….†(using your words)?
Comment by good_golly — January 22, 2008 @ 2:49 pm
—-
You’re logic is faulty. The OP’s logic is below:
If a CountryP attacks NationQ without provocation then NationQ’s allies would be justified in attacking that nation.
If a Iran attacks Israel without provocation then Israel’s allies would be justified in attacking Iran.
I know that trolling is hard work, but please try and keep your logic straight.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:20 pmYep, Yosemite Sam is an angry, sick person, like most of the neo cons, and like most neo cons had other things to do during the Vietnam war than fight. Another neo con trait is not accepting responsibility for their actions; so when Iran initiates retaliatory strikes against U.S. interests after an Israel attack, the neo cons will head for cover, then come out for invading Iran. Go John!
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:22 pmalthough i disagree with bolton’s wider point, what he specifically says here is not that far off the mark (considering how extreme bolton has been, and continues to be).
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:26 pmdid bolton mention anything about a nuclear weapon in the entire text of bolton’s interview?
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:27 pmThis private citizen says that Rice has no credibility left with the American people. She is a puppet, and a poor quality one at that.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:28 pmA blind dismissal of Israel’s right to self-determination and the “lumping” of a potential preemptive Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear sites with the neocon agenda is short-sighted and misguided.
We need to grapple deeper with the geopolitical realities affecting Israel.
Imagine, fellow citizens, if a report came out that a dictatorship neighboring the United States had the capability to acquire nuclear weapons within three to five years. Now imagine that that country had made statements that the United States should be wiped off the map. Furthermore, imagine that the country in question had been selling long-range rockets and guns to our other enemy neighbors for years, who continuously terrorize our cities with mortar and shelling, perform suicide bombings whenever our backs are turned, and release propaganda continuously referring to the Americans as inhuman.
In this situation, do you think it would be inappropriate for America to simply raise the possibility that we would initiate a targeted, low-casualty strike on our enemy’s nuclear sites?
Oh Progressives, you have so much positive energy in your motivated, iconoclastic bodies. I know that your categorical promotion of liberty, nonviolence and individuality can sometimes lead you to reject regimes that have to sometimes assume less-than-peaceful means to accomplish their noble ends.
But keep in mind that Israel is a state founded on progressive, left-wing, socialist ideals–a state that aspires to an ideal of equality unparalleled in the modern world. Their existence and survival is crucial to the promulgation of ideas of organizations like your own.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:36 pmDon’t these returds have any brains? Do they not think of the consciences of their actions at all? Does the destruction and slaughter of innocents mean nothing to these sickos.
Just more proof that the world needs to rid itself of the repukians christofascists and their ilk.
Bush/Cheney
Hague Trials ‘09
Buck Fush
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:37 pmNow imagine that that country had made statements that the United States should be wiped off the map.
Comment by ThinkBalanced — January 22, 2008 @ 3:36 pm
You’ll need to imagine that about Iran and Israel, too, since Iran never made such a statement.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:40 pmBut keep in mind that Israel is a state founded on progressive, left-wing, socialist ideals–a state that aspires to an ideal of equality unparalleled in the modern world. Their existence and survival is crucial to the promulgation of ideas of organizations like your own.
Comment by ThinkBalanced — January 22, 2008 @ 3:36 pm
Ethnic cleansing, land-grabs, and ethnic/religious discriminiation are not progressive, left wing ideals.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:41 pmBut keep in mind that Israel is a state founded on progressive, left-wing, socialist ideals–a state that aspires to an ideal of equality unparalleled in the modern world. Their existence and survival is crucial to the promulgation of ideas of organizations like your own.
Comment by ThinkBalanced — January 22, 2008 @ 3:36 pm
Another load of jingoistic fantasy brought to you by AIPAC.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:41 pmI’m having trouble finding the argument here:
First it was Iran is a nucular (I think that’s how the WH says it) threat. So we have to bomb Iran before they nuke us.
Then the NIE says Iran doesn’t have the resources to make a nuke.
So now the argument is that if we don’t bomb Iran, then Israel will. Sounds to me kind of like “I’m friends with the geeky kid in school. But I’d better beat him up because if I don’t, someone else will.”
At least if Israel attacks, they are the ones who will have to defend their actions. And their neighboring states will have the option of taking appropriate countermeasures.
Assuming that we aren’t involved and not defending their actions, at least we then have the option to decide how much we are in that fight.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:42 pmImagine, fellow citizens, if a report came out that a dictatorship neighboring the United States had the capability to acquire nuclear weapons within three to five years. Now imagine that that country had made statements that the United States should be wiped off the map.
Comment by ThinkBalanced
Well, since neither of your first two statements is true, why should we read the rest of your missive? Iran is not 3 to 5 years from having the ability to make a nuclear weapon and the “wipe Israel off the map” canard was debunked a long time ago.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:50 pmI can’t believe we would allow a tool of the Israeli government like Bolton to run our foreign policy. Would you feel ok with giving that kind of power to other countries??? Should we have former British officials serving in high US government positions, telling us how the US should react, and threatening us with UK’s actions if we don’t comply? Would we be ok with giving Chinese officials this kind of power in our government? or French? This is AMERICA. It’s time we started making foreign policy decisions which benefit AMERICA, not any other country. I don’t care if Israel is an ally or not. That doesn’t mean they should dictate our foreign policy. We’ve allowed neo-cons with loyalties to foreign governments to hijack our government.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:53 pmWell said…take to the streets lazy Americans….burn synagogues, kill those disloyal Americam Zionists otherwise they will kill you and your kids. We need another Bill Kristol nacht
Comment by jason baddo — January 22, 2008 @ 3:56 pm
Troll detected.
January 22nd, 2008 at 4:00 pm70. Fool detected. Idiot, I mean what I say…Zionists are responsible for the financial mess around the globe and tension iin the Mid-East. Yet, the average Yank is clueless.
Comment by jason baddo — January 22, 2008 @ 4:06 pm
Zionism has nothing to do with world financial markets. You are trolling a legitimate discussion about Israeli policy and U.S. Middle East policy with anti-semitic crap just to fuel the “progressives are anti-semitic” myth. Stop it. You’re not fooling anyone.
January 22nd, 2008 at 4:14 pmformer US Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton…
WTF? He was never confirmed by the Senate for this position, therefore,
the best he could be called is ‘Bush’s interim but unconfirmed temporary
appointee’ to the UN.
January 22nd, 2008 at 4:22 pmRight?
This has nothing to do with anti-Semitism, or some kind of Jewish world conspiracy. As an anglo, I would have just as much problem with British officials in our government acting on behalf of the UK. We need to act in the best interests of the United States, not in ANY other countries’ interests.
Israel has proven they can defend themselves anyways. So even if this phony threat from Iran WAS true, Israel should act in their own interests and defend themselves if necessary. They shouldn’t try to threaten us by saying they will act if we do not. That’s an attempt to hijack our foreign policy and push us into acting for them. They should make their own decisions and face the consequences of their own actions.
January 22nd, 2008 at 4:24 pmIsrael has proven they can defend themselves anyways. So even if this phony threat from Iran WAS true, Israel should act in their own interests and defend themselves if necessary. They shouldn’t try to threaten us by saying they will act if we do not. That’s an attempt to hijack our foreign policy and push us into acting for them. They should make their own decisions and face the consequences of their own actions.
Comment by BrianFL
Actually I think you have it backwards. Israel is not trying to push us to attack Iran for them, we are trying to push Israel to attack Iran for us!
If they want to attack Iran, then I say we stay out of it. It will be their fight, not ours and we should keep our nose where it belongs, and that is in this country trying to fix the mess the Bush Crime Family has made out of our government.
January 22nd, 2008 at 4:28 pmJason:
What country are you blogging from? Clearly NOT the US, and I seriously doubt you are a US citizen.
Yank this.
Comment by plunger
Good point. Haven’t seen Jason around for a while. Maybe this is his new identity. Sounds like him.
And plunger, I have to say that I appreciate the brevity of your recent posts. I would like to continue to read your posts, but not if they go more than one screen full.
January 22nd, 2008 at 4:30 pmHmmmm…it is quite shocking to see the less-than-civic response my (albeit) longwinded characterization of Israel has received. I will not dignify some of my ideological adversaries with a response to their hackneyed allegations of Israel’s “ethnic cleansing” (Israel being a pluralistic democracy, in favor of a two-state solution, and containing thousands of Arabs within its borders who enjoy the protection of the Israeli government).
That being said, I leave the group with this question:
What would it take for Israel to be “just” in your eyes? To remove the security fence/wall and let suicide attacks continue? To stand by passively while their enemies potentially acquire bigger and greater weapons, capable of targeting their population centers? To suddenly declare Hamas a non-terrorist entity, and accept their savage tactics of “statecraft”? For the Jews to go back to their slaughter as they did in the 1940s?
January 22nd, 2008 at 4:38 pmWhen was the last time any politician in America engaged in a “legitimate†discussion about so-called Israeli policy & U.S. Middle East policy before they were branded anti-Semites?? Do they names Mearsheimer & Walt mean anything to you ? Or perhaps the names of Palestinian women & children slaughtered by our dear “ally†with American hardware ?
Comment by jason baddo — January 22, 2008 @ 4:25 pm
The names Mearsheimer and Walt do mean something to me - I’m reading The Israel Lobby right now and it’s quite good. And I haven’t found a list of the names of the 40+ Palestinians killed and injured in Israel’s latest rocket attack on Gaza, but I do condemn the acts of aggression and collective punishment. Take a look at my blog and my posting history here and you’ll see where I stand on the issue of Israel/Palestine.
What I’m not doing is blaming these acts on all Jews, or using the coded language of anti-Semitism to oppose Israeli policy. Not all Jews are Zionists. Not all Zionists are Jews. Calling for a “Kristol nacht” and the “burning of synagogues” is just racism and bigotry.
You don’t fight racism and bigotry with more racism and bigotry.
January 22nd, 2008 at 4:49 pmWhy is anyone reporting Bolton’s comments?
January 22nd, 2008 at 4:55 pmWhat would it take for Israel to be “just†in your eyes?
End the occupation of all territories seized in 1967, remove settlers from Palestinian lands seized in 1967, allow Palestinian refugees displaced in 1948 to return to their homelands, and work towards a viable two- or one-state solution that allows the Palestinian people to control their ports, border crossings, watersheds, and airspace. Ideally, they could also work towards an eventual one-state solution, but that’s a century off at this rate.
To remove the security fence/wall and let suicide attacks continue?
They’re more than welcome to build the Apartheid Wall on their own land. They should not be building it on Palestinian land and disrupting Palestinian livelihoods.
To stand by passively while their enemies potentially acquire bigger and greater weapons, capable of targeting their population centers?
No, they should be engaging their neighbors diplomatically. If they start working towards a viable peace with the Palestinian people, and return the land they stole from their neighbors, their neighbors will cease to be enemies.
To suddenly declare Hamas a non-terrorist entity, and accept their savage tactics of “statecraft�
Why not? They suddenly declared Fatah a non-terrorist entity and accepted their corrupt and incompetent tactics of statecraft.
For the Jews to go back to their slaughter as they did in the 1940s?
Comment by ThinkBalanced — January 22, 2008 @ 4:38 pm
No, they don’t need to resurrect Irgun and Lehi and the other pre-1948 terrorist groups. The IDF is much more efficient at slaughtering innocents, surely.
January 22nd, 2008 at 5:04 pmToasterhead, I’m glad you’ve found the time to reflect on the Gaza/Israel issue in a way that is more meaningful than most. I have read the book and the authors make some quasi-astute observations.
However, for someone that has studied the issue critically, one becomes pretty puzzled at the shallowness of their scholarship, at their failure to acknowledge the power of other just-as-powerful lobbies like the AARP and the NRA, and their purposeful ignorance of the sale of arms to to Arab countries that avow Israel’s destruction. Before you finish reading the Walt and Mearsheimer book, I challenge you to read Leslie Gelb’s short explanation of the issue in the Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/ 2007/ 09/ 23/ books/ review/ Gelb-t.html?_r=3&ref=books&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
It rests on logic more tenable than that applied by Walt and Mearsheimer to their argument, and relies on a deeper understanding of the issues.
January 22nd, 2008 at 5:10 pm“That increases the pressure on Israel in that period of time… if it feels Iran is on the verge of acquiring that capability, it brings the decision point home to use force,â€
January 22nd, 2008 at 5:20 pm—so what!!! Let Israel start its own war. Why is the responsibility of the U.S. to attack Iran FOR Israel?
End the occupation of all territories seized in 1967, remove settlers from Palestinian lands seized in 1967, allow Palestinian refugees displaced in 1948 to return to their homelands, and work towards a viable two- or one-state solution that allows the Palestinian people to control their ports, border crossings, watersheds, and airspace. Ideally, they could also work towards an eventual one-state solution, but that’s a century off at this rate.
–The mythical “right of return” you are alluding to is non-existent. Palestinian refugees have been kept in their camps by their Arab hosts as a political ploy to foster resentment and keep the possibility of “repatriating” Israel open, after their first attempt to push Israel into the sea was thwarted.
They’re more than welcome to build the Apartheid Wall on their own land. They should not be building it on Palestinian land and disrupting Palestinian livelihoods.
–The majority of the Wall (let’s be civic here, and not adhere to Carter’s canards, which has apologized for, I might add) is on Israeli land. If Palestinian’s want their villages back, tell them to stop blowing up Israeli children.
No, they should be engaging their neighbors diplomatically. If they start working towards a viable peace with the Palestinian people, and return the land they stole from their neighbors, their neighbors will cease to be enemies.
–Diplomacy has been tried and tested by Israeli foreign ambassador after foreign ambassador. And Israel continues to use diplomacy with Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia–all countries that professed Israel’s destruction at one point throughout the last 40 years. They are engaged in negotiations with Mahmoud Abbas currently.
Why not? They suddenly declared Fatah a non-terrorist entity and accepted their corrupt and incompetent tactics of statecraft.
–Fatah renounced their assertion that Israel must be eradicated. They are pushing for their own state that rests alongside Israel and do not want to destroy Israel completely as does Hamas.
No, they don’t need to resurrect Irgun and Lehi and the other pre-1948 terrorist groups. The IDF is much more efficient at slaughtering innocents, surely.
–This last one makes no sense.
January 22nd, 2008 at 5:25 pmSo Israel is encouraged to shoot first and ask questions later because of an Islamic oil state that might have nukes by the London olympics, but we are supporting Musharraf’s iron-fist nuclear regime in Pakistan, one that’s disappearing to the back burner or less.
This is like a bad WWE tag-team match, the Shining Reasonable Judeo-Christians against the Arab (or close enough) Jihadi Devils.
What if Saudi Arabia attacked Israel, whom would the neocons choose!
January 22nd, 2008 at 5:29 pmWhy is it that so few realize that if Israel thinks there’s a need to attack Iran they would do so? They don’t typically wait for others to sanction their actions.
January 22nd, 2008 at 5:48 pm“That increases the pressure on Israel in that period of time… if it feels Iran is on the verge of acquiring that [nuclear] capability, it brings the decision point home to use force,†he [Bolton] said.
Um-hmmm. And Israel will use whatever and however much force is necessary … including nuclear … to “protect” itself.
Cheers,
January 22nd, 2008 at 6:00 pmwtf…..when you see footage of fighting between israel and palestine you will always see a modern well equiped well trained military in uniform using all of the modern hell fire at thier command against boys and young men with rocks and not much more than bottle rockets and you want me to feel sorry for israel???
sounds much like warsaw….
January 22nd, 2008 at 7:13 pmWhy wait?
Why wouldn’t Israel deserve punishment after violating every UN resolution, and the Geneva Convention?
Comment by Juan C. — January 22, 2008 @ 2:48 pm
Because the psycho ZioNazis are the Chosen Ones just like the American Christo-Fascists. They are answerable to only dog…..er…..god, even though it is a slightly different deity in each case.
“He’s been there…and you probably don’t even know where you are.”
Dr. Harry Cox, commenting on a dog whose ancestors (he claims) came from outer space millions of years ago to rule the Earth.”
Firesign Theatre - Everything You Know Is Wrong
January 22nd, 2008 at 7:17 pmI personally admire the Palesininans(spelling?) They would rather do without water or electricity or jobs than allow the Israelies to dominate them. Talk about some patriats.
Yassar Aarofat was a nobel peace prize winner…..I know trolls are droolin but sadly for you guys a lot of intelligent people believed that he deserved it……no worry about any of the bushies receiving such an honor.
January 22nd, 2008 at 7:37 pm.
MAKING ILLEGAL WAR BY PROXY
.
January 23rd, 2008 at 4:11 amThis shoot first and ask questions later policy is what got us into Iraq. This guy has a serious control freak issue and he needs some help. Why start a war that could lead to $5.00 a gallon gas prices? Because he and his rich republican friends can pay that much and not hurt. So lets just go right ahead and ruin the rest of our ecomony.
January 23rd, 2008 at 12:07 pm