Only Israel has no right to defend itself…

(HT/Cookie)

Is it that the world doesn’t care about Jewish blood spilt? Or is it that too many like it?

For an extended treatment of this issue by someone who keeps his head level, his eye on the ball, and unfailingly finds clarity despite being surrounded by madfolk, see Robin Shepherd’s A State Beyond the Pale: Europe’s Problem with Israel. I’ll post on his chapter on Islam in Europe shortly.

38 Responses to Only Israel has no right to defend itself…

  1. incognito says:

    Too many like it an the rest don’t care. Where do you think this combination leads to?

  2. [...] Augean Stables » Only Israel has no right to defend itself… theaugeanstables.com/2010/07/06/only-israel-has-no-right-to-defend-itself/ – view page – cached + “Post-Modern” Anti-Semitism: Cognitive Egocentrism, Moral Schadenfreude, and “Progressive” Anti-Zionism * Multiple-Part Essays + PJ (OSM) Media Launch + Mainstreaming Conspiracy Theories + Open Letter to Jostein Gaarder * HERZILYA CONFERENCE + Conceptual Principles + Program with Links + Bibliography * Saïd and Honor-Shame * Richard Landes CV Tweets about this link [...]

  3. Lorenz Gude says:

    I think it is less a case of not caring or even hatred than fear of Islamism. Westerners fear their own blood getting spilled and is therefore indifferent and prefer Jewish blood being spilled instead of their own. (Perhaps these Westerners think Jewish blood is different? I don’t.) Perhaps it is coming to a time when Israel needs to remind the world that it can and will hold nations that aid and abet Islamism to account. I noticed that Iran backed off when Israel said that if the proposed Iranian ship tried to breach the blockade it would be regarded as an act of war. I also noticed the Iranians immediately backed off. I would also make it clear that further attacks by Hamas or Hezbollah will be regarded as acts of war by Iran and should they take place Israel will consider itself in a state of war with the Islamic republic.

  4. incognito says:

    Perhaps it is coming to a time when Israel needs to remind the world that it can and will hold nations that aid and abet Islamism to account.

    For that Israel needs leadership and that it lacks.
    Furthermore, you can see how the Israeli public is behaving in ways that are contradictory to its interest:
    the academia and left is undermining it for all to see, and they march to force the govt to cave in to Hamas blackmail on Shalit which, I almost guranatee, Bibi will do. This does not translate into what you suggest.

    I noticed that Iran backed off when Israel said that if the proposed Iranian ship tried to breach the blockade it would be regarded as an act of war.

    Pls read Aumann’s piece I linked to in the previous thread. It explains almost everything.

  5. dladams says:

    Your readers will likely appreciate this article:

    http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.6649/pub_detail.asp

    Keep up the excellent work.

    Regards,
    DLA

  6. incognito says:

    This is a must read, particularly for those who think Obama is gifted, and underlies why Israel should stay as far from Obama’s policies as possible:

    President Dogbert
    By Randall Hoven
    http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/07/president_dogbert_1.html

  7. incognito says:

    Read the following in the context of both the Aumann article on the Blackmailer Paradox and the one above by Randall Hoven:

    Visiting Privileges
    By Lee Smith
    http://www.tabletmag.com/news-and-politics/38529/visiting-privileges/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=visiting-privileges

  8. incognito says:

    And read this too in the context of Aumann’s article:

    The March for Gilad Shalit
    by Benjamin Kerstein
    http://newledger.com/2010/07/the-march-for-gilad-shalit/

  9. Lorenz Gude says:

    @incognito

    I agree Israel may indeed lack the leadership and solidarity to do that.

    I read Aumman’s piece which does a nice job of exposing what is happening with ‘peace negotiations’ in terms of game theory. In light of the game theory discussed, it seems to me that Israel’s assurance to the UN that it would regard an Iranian blockade running ship as an act of war was a change in the game as Aumman describes. It calls the blackmailers’s bluff and extracts Israel from the Blackmailer’s Paradox in so far as sending more ships is concerned. It did it by threatening the power behind the proxies – Iran – and it changed the game. I wonder if the Turks will send more now?

    I sense that Israel is not going to take out Iran’s nukes and try to contain a nuclear Iran. I think that would be disastrous. I also think Iran is a bully with a shaky totalitarian regime that the Iranian people would be glad to the back of. So standing up to them would have a good chance of working and the time to hit them is before they get nukes. Again, I am afraid that you are correct that Israel doesn’t have what it takes to do the necessary.

  10. incognito says:

    it seems to me that Israel’s assurance to the UN that it would regard an Iranian blockade running ship as an act of war was a change in the game as Aumman describes.

    Yes and no.

    It was a deviation from the habit of conceding or doing nothing, but for it to be a change of game it would have to be (a) systematic, across all events and times (b) from start to end. It is neither and, as you shall see, Israel will fall back into the usual pattern pretty fast. That means that it never learns either from its failures or its successes.

    I sense that Israel is not going to take out Iran’s nukes and try to contain a nuclear Iran. I think that would be disastrous.

    Not with current leadership and in the context of appeasing an anti-semitic west. But at the very least it should have acted AS IF it would do it, which has value.

    I also think Iran is a bully with a shaky totalitarian regime that the Iranian people would be glad to the back of.

    Much of it yes. But the interests of the elite, particularly the IGRC are so immense that they will defend the regime at all cost.

    Again, I am afraid that you are correct that Israel doesn’t have what it takes to do the necessary.

    There are 3 rotten aspects of Israel that inhibit leadership and effective response to reality: the electoral method, the ultra-religious component and the Supreme Court. Between them they have been bringing Israel down since its inception. To the extent that Israel survived and flourished to date, it was IN SPITE, and not because of them.

  11. incognito says:

    What are the peace prospects with this?

    Mother of baby saved by Israelis wants him to murder them
    http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2010/07/mother-of-baby-saved-by-israelis-wants.html

  12. Cynic says:

    incognito,

    From your link in #6 Benjamin Kerstein does not consider something very important and that is that Hamas is more interested in using Shalit to boost its image than in freeing 1000 terrorists.
    For every concession that Israel will make Hamas will demand more.
    Just as the “peace process” has demonstrated the Arabs wring every last drop of blood out of Israel and still not be satisfied.
    As one of the those commenting in the Lee Smith article put it:

    But a negotiated peace agreement with Israel is not and never has been the goal of the Palestinians, rather they have always seen the negotiations as another battlefield in their war to exterminate Israel and the Jews. The Palestinian strategy is to replace Israel with a Palestinian state, not to coexist peacefully with Israel.

  13. incognito says:

    Hamas is more interested in using Shalit to boost its image than in freeing 1000 terrorists.For every concession that Israel will make Hamas will demand more.

    The question is what Israel does, given this. That’s what Aumann is talking about.

    The real problem is that Israel KNOWS all this, yet behaves as if it is oblivious to it.

  14. incognito says:

    MUST READ.

    Outside the box, or out of their minds?
    By Michael Young
    http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&categ_id=5&article_id=116836#axzz0t2kOvnBT

    Out of their minds, wouldn’t you say?

  15. E.G. says:

    Here we go. Again.

    Is Israel a normal country?
    By Ian Buruma

  16. incognito says:

    Yeah. Yawn.

    Walter Reich argues yes, it is, and that it deserves better. Don’t hold your breath.

  17. incognito says:

    Ian Buruma is professor of democracy and human rights at Bard College.

    When I was in graduate school such nobody would even think of such crappola appointments. That in itself should indicate the collapse of education.

    It’s bestowing academic patina to aspiring frustrated politicians (usually of the left) who can’t cut it in politics.

  18. incognito says:

    Glick didn’t have to wait long for even better validating evidence:

    Abbas to Arabs: We’d Support a War Against Israel
    PA Chairman tells Arab League: “If you want war, and if all of you will fight Israel, we are in favor.”

    Too bad for Abbas that arabs don’t give an ff about the pals beyond incitement and propaganda. Fighting a war for the pals? I think not.

  19. incognito says:

    PM: Peace plan possible by end of ’11
    Netanyahu: We need Palestinian partnership; Obama woos on channel 2

    Really?

    We should not criticize only Obama and the west for the illusion of peace — Israeli politicians who ought to know better contribute to the illusion by making such stupid statements.

  20. E.G. says:

    incognito,

    “Crappola appointments”: the chair title or its incumbent?
    I find the title Orwellian.

  21. E.G. says:

    I find this Aumann interview (in Hebrew) even better:

    http://www.nrg.co.il/online/1/ART2/130/262.html

  22. incognito says:

    “Crappola appointments”: the chair title or its incumbent?

    What chance do you give that the appointment to such a title is not crappola itself?

  23. Cynic says:

    With regard to the link in #22

    …. shows that over the past five decades, the number of hours that the average college student studies each week has been steadily dropping.

    and displays the mass acceptance of Gorebal Warmening and Krugsian Keynes of economics by the elites that has brought us to this sorry start to the 21st century as the disinformation age.

  24. Simon says:

    This is a good commentary on Jewish liberals. Sorry if has been posted before. With Pete Beinhart & Elliot Abrams.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNL9JRfN-Uo

  25. incognito says:

    Cynic,

    and displays the mass acceptance of Gorebal Warmening and Krugsian Keynes of economics by the elites that has brought us to this sorry start to the 21st century as the disinformation age.

    For how long have I argued the collapse of education and, hence, of knowledge and ability to reason?

  26. incognito says:

    The Western Press and Hezbollah
    Two, three, many Nasrs.
    BY Lee Smith
    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/western-press-and-hezbollah

  27. incognito says:

    Lee Smith puts better the puzzle I raised:

    And as an Arab she’s taking the fall for a conviction held by virtually all of her Western professional peers.

    Perhaps CNN wanted to deflect from its non-arabs who “respect” Hezballah and show how “tough” they are.

  28. incognito says:

    How to institutionalize appeasement rather than strategy, ignorance rather knowledge, process rather than interests and fear rather than reason via an already collapsed educational system:

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2010/07/026723.php

    Charles Hill should not teach at 3 universities. Why pass on utter failures to young generations?

  29. incognito says:

    Lebanese army to protect UNIFIL
    Army chief announces plans to send brigade south to help peacekeepers.

    So now the protectors of the peace must be protected by the lebanese army, who is in cahoots with Hezballah.

    And this is the arrangement the west wants to impose in the west bank. If Israel agrees it does not deserve to survive.

  30. Eliyahu says:

    Incog, re #32,

    Octavia Nasr’s “Western professional peers” find themselves in agreement with part of the British Foreign Office. As you probably know already, the ambassadress of Her Majesty to the Islamic Republic of Beirut expressed great admiration for Fadlallah. She was even stronger in her adulation for him than Octavia was.

    I want to know what the guy had that made the girls go for him so much.

    Be that as it may, the ambassadress’ indiscretion shows that the UK Establishment is not far from the “Leftist” pro-Islamist mind-set found among bbc and cnn “journalists.”

  31. incognito says:

    Eliyahu,

    Exactly. Hence the puzzle: why did they sack Nasr who expressed a widespread common view by pundits, academics, journalists and even governments? Particularly since they knew they were going to be accused of caving in to jews, which is the last thing they want.

    I want to know what the guy had that made the girls go for him so much.

    Do you know the one about the rabbi who told the guy who complained too many people lived in his small house to first bring in a goat into the house, then after a while take it out?

    You’ve got Islam that deems women inferior who should be subjugated and oppressed and treated like shit and then you’ve got one who talks to a female foreign journalist — wow!. Given that that’s gold for her career, do you really think she would consider anything else?

  32. incognito says:

    Imagine a woman ambassador to an arab country and this guy actually talked to her. Wouldn’t she appreciate it, given how she is probably treated generally?

    A bad guy who makes minimal exceptions — now that muct be appreciated.

  33. Cynic says:

    Eliyahu,

    I want to know what the guy had that made the girls go for him so much.

    I remember hearing a saying of the macho types, after a few beers: “treat em mean, keep em keen!”.
    Maybe it works psychologically on certain stunted minds.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>