Posts tagged ‘Israel’

11/23/2011

Republican Debate Foreign Policy (11-12)

The Republican Presidential candidates debated again on Nov. 12, 2011.

CHINA: Romney said we have something China needs, which is a global market, but they must play by the rules and cannot manipulate currency to cause prices to fall below market levels. He would sue China in the WTO to win the right to selectively impose tariffs. Huntsman said the WTO does not allow us to sue over currency issues, and trade war would only hurt U.S. exports. Perry believes China will end up on the ash heap of history.

EURO: Huntsman warned Europe is second only to Canada as a U.S. export market, and if they go down, it will spread back to us.

RUSSIA: While discussing Iran, Romney sounded like he considered Russia an enemy, as he accused Obama of giving them what they wanted. It was not clear if he knew what he was saying.

ISRAEL: Paranoid Bachmann thinks “the table is being set for a worldwide nuclear war against Israel,” as she baselessly accused Obama of not being willing to stand with them.

FOREIGN POLICY: Ron Paul noted our foreign policy is bad, because we pretend we are at war. We are only at war against a tactic, he said. There is in fact no declared war. Gingrich said our foreign aid should start at zero for each country every year. Egypt should explain why they should receive a penny. He would adopt a strong policy against what he called UN “absurdities.” Perry thinks we are in a real war, and would deal with every country, including Israel, by denying foreign aid if they do not support us.

AFGHANISTAN: Huntsman said there is a lack of security in Afghanistan, but it is time to come home. We achieved our objectives by uprooting the Taliban, dismantling al-Qaeda, and killing Osama bin Laden. Elections were held. The U.S. should not use 100,000 troops to do nation-building there. Romney would not negotiate with the Taliban, because he said we don’t negotiate with terrorists. He claims our commanders in the field do not want our troops withdrawn, but Obama is taking them out early. His timetable is to stay until 2014. Perry said he would complete the mission (whatever that means). He thinks we are making progress, and a timetable to pull out is irresponsible. He said our military is doing the best they can, considering the lack of support from the administration, and the telegraphing to the enemy that we are leaving. Santorum said victory over the Taliban does not mean wiping them out, because we can’t do that. It means neutering them, so they are no longer a security threat. Bachmann said Obama sent a surge of only 30,000, instead of the 40,000 requested, and made a fatal decision to withdraw by Sept. 2012. Gingrich said the Taliban survive, because they have sanctuary in Pakistan. Cain was asked what it is about the situation in Afghanistan that has been going on for 10 years that is so unclear that he cannot answer questions about it. He said victory is not clearly defined. He would define the mission.

PAKISTAN: Romney said Pakistan is a fragile nation which is close to a failed state. He wants to make sure they allow us to go after Taliban and the Haqqani Network. Santorum said we cannot be indecisive about whether Pakistan is a friend, because they have nuclear weapons. He would continue aid for Pakistan, and would work through our difficulties. He would work with the Pakistani military and their intelligence network, because they do not back the Haqqani Network. Gingrich said we do not getting reliable intelligence from Pakistan, and we have to rely on friends. Bachmann said Pakistan is a place where terrorists receive training, but she would not deny aid, because they have nuclear weapons. Cain said he didn’t know if Pakistan was a friend or foe.

IRAN: Ron Paul said it is not worth going to war against Iran to prevent them from gaining nuclear weapons. Intervention would have to go through Congress, because the Commander-in-Chief cannot make that decision. What is going on right now is the same war propaganda used against Iraq. If a Declaration of War is made, you fight to win, and get it over with. Romney would support the Iranian dissidents who took to the streets and would impose sanctions. He said Obama should have made it clear we will take military action to keep Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. If Obama is re-elected, he predicted Iran will gain nuclear weapon, but if Romney is chosen, they will not. In addition to crippling sanctions, he would encourage regime change, and if that fails, he would use military force. Perry would sanction the Iranian Central Bank and shut down their economy. Santorum said Iran must not get a nuclear weapon. He hopes we have been acting covertly to make sure it does not happen. He wants to work with Israel and let them take out Iran’s nuclear capabilities, like they did in Iraq and Syria. Gingrich would maximize covert operations to block and disrupt the Iranian program. He would take out their scientists. He would coordinate his efforts with Israel. Cain would assist the Iranian opposition who are trying to overthrow the regime. Because Iran uses oil as a weapon, he wants U.S. energy independence. He would put economic pressure on Iran through sanctions. He would deploy ballistic missile defense Aegis warships in the Persian Gulf.

ARAB SPRING: Cain thinks Obama was on the wrong side in nearly every Arab Spring situation. He thinks Obama mishandled the revolutions. Our relationship with Egypt may not survive, because the Muslim Brotherhood may gain control. Obama said the President of Yemen must go, even though he is our friend.

SYRIA: Ron Paul said the Syrians need to deal with Syria. It is a tragedy many died, but we would only get in trouble if we got into it. We should support self-determination. Romney said it is time for the Assad dictatorship to end. We should help with covert activities. He said Syria is an ally of Iran, and we should aid Turkey and Saudi Arabia. Gingrich said it was good the Arab League suspended Syria. The administration dumped Egypt’s Mubarek in a heartbeat, but did not go after Assad. He would take covert action against Assad.

GUANTANAMO AND TORTURE: Ron Paul correctly pointed out torture is illegal under our laws, and international law. He added water-boarding is torture. He said there is no evidence reliable information is gained. It’s uncivilized and immoral, he said.  Huntsman, who lived overseas four times, said we diminish our standing in the world as to liberty, democracy, and human rights, when we torture. Water-boarding is torture, and we should not use it. Perry is for enhanced interrogation techniques, because he thinks we are involved in a war. Santorum would allow enhanced interrogation techniques, because he thinks they are successful in obtaining information. He would keep Guantanamo open. Bachmann would use water-boarding, because she thinks it is useful for gaining information. She made the ridiculous statement Obama is letting the ACLU run the CIA. She claims Obama wants to lose the war on terror, because we now have no place for terrorists. Cain does not agree with torture, but trusts the military leaders to determine what is, and what is not, torture. He called water-boarding an enhanced interrogation technique, but not torture. He would allow the military to use enhanced interrogation techniques, because he thinks anyone picked up must necessarily be a terrorist.

CIVILIAN COURTS: Paul said over 300 individuals charged with terrorism were convicted in civilian courts and most are in prison. We should not give up so easily on the rule of law, he said. Santorum thinks civilian courts are one of the worst ideas he ever heard of, because people there have constitutional rights. People who attacked our country should not enjoy rights, he said. He also said he believes in the Geneva Conventions, but when they don’t play by the rules, they don’t enjoy rights under Geneva.

ASSASSINATION: Romney said it was correct for the President alone to order the death of American citizens suspected of terrorism. He claimed one individual allied himself with a group that declared war on the U.S. and if they bear arms against us, they are fair game. Gingrich said they were more than suspects. They were found guilty of trying to kill Americans, not by a court, but by a panel. He said enemy combatants have no right to go to court. Waging war on the U.S. is outside criminal law. It is correct to kill people who are trying to kill you.

BUDGET: Huntsman said our debt is a national security risk. Greece has a 170% debt to GDP. Italian debt is 120% to GDP. Japan is 100% debt to GDP. Our debt is 70% to GDP and moving up. We need to send Medicaid and Education back to the states. The Ryan plan puts everything on the table, he said. Romney would eliminate programs we cannot afford, such as Obamacare. That would save 95 billion per year. He would eliminate Public Broadcasting, and the Endowment for the Arts. He would re-direct Medicaid to the states. Gingrich wants the unemployed to receive training, so they do not get something for doing nothing.  Bachmann said the debt is out of control since LBJ created the welfare state. She said military expenditures should also be reduced. Instead of a cost plus billing, we need a fixed cost system. We have to modernize military medical costs. Gingrich thinks the Navy is shrinking and would invest in it and rebuild it.

10/19/2011

Republican Debate: Nevada (10-18-11)

The Republican Presidential candidates debated in Nevada.

DEFENSE SPENDING: Ron Paul said there is a lot of money in the military budget that does no good. We have an empire with 900 bases in 150 countries, and would be safer if we were not in so many places. Why keep troops in Korea, Japan, or Germany? We have more weapons than all other nations combined, Paul said, enough to blow up the world 20 to 25 times. Bachmann said defense spending should be on the table, but not 500 million. Gingrich would determine our threats, and calculate the cost of a response. Santorum would not cut a penny of military spending.

AFGHANISTAN: Ron Paul said the U.S. should withdraw from Afghanistan, because the Soviet Union was brought down by entering that country, and the same thing will happen to us.

FOREIGN AID: Romney said we spend more on foreign aid than we should, and we should let China do it, because it makes no sense to borrow from China to give aid to others. Paul would cut all foreign aid, including aid to Israel, saying the Constitution does not authorize it. Aid to Israel does not help, but only teaches dependency. We take from the poor, Paul said, and give to the rich in poor states. He said look at the aid we gave to Egypt. We spent billions pumping up a dictator, and yet they are hostile to us. Cain would give foreign aid to friends, like Israel, but not enemies. Bachmann opposed cutting foreign aid to Israel, since she believes they are our greatest ally.

ISRAEL: Bachmann incorrectly accused Obama of being the first president since Israeli independence to put daylight between our nations. (She never studied Eisenhower’s stand at Suez in 1956)

UN & PALESTINE: Perry thought it was a travesty for the Palestinian Authority to go to the UN to seek statehood. He asked why the U.S. is contributing to the UN. He would defund it.

LIBYA & IRAQ: Bachmann wants Libya and Iraq to reimburse us for the cost of bombing their countries. She wants our troops to have immunity for any and all wrongdoing committed in Iraq.

IRAN: Bachmann accused Iran of an attempted assassination on U.S. soil. The number one global issue, she said, is Iran and nuclear weapons. She called their leader a genocidal maniac, but offered no proof to back up her claim. Santorum also said our central threat is Iran. Neither candidate explained how or why they see Iran as a credible threat to the U.S.

TERROR: Paul said Reagan negotiated with Iranian terrorists for a return of hostages. Gingrich said Reagan made a mistake. Bachmann would not release anyone at Guantanamo. Can would not negotiate. Santorum would never negotiate, period.

WALL STREET: Cain had said: “Don’t blame Wall Street, don’t blame the big banks. If you don’t have a job, and you are not rich, blame yourself.” He said Wall Street did nothing wrong; they did not spend a trillion for no good. Protesters should be in front of the White House, Cain said. Ron Paul accused Cain of blaming victims. He would protest in front of the Federal Reserve and in Washington. The bailout was supported by both parties, Paul said. They bailed out big corporations, who ripped off people in the derivatives market. They thought the world would end if we did not bail banks out. The middle class got stuck. Paul said if money was given out, it should have gone to people who lost their mortgages, not the banks. Romney called the protests dangerous class warfare, and said Obama is to blame over the past three years, as he says he has no idea how the private sector works.

HOUSING: Santorum said Romney, Perry, and Cain supported TARP. Cain said people on the top who took risks got bailed out in 2008, but the market should have been allowed to work. Perry wanted Congress to act, but did not want TARP. Santorum said Perry supported the particular TARP plan on the House floor. Romney said government should not give a couple thousand dollars to buy a new home, or to keep banks from foreclosing.

JOBS: Perry wants to focus on the 9% unemployed. Santorum said no more products “Made in America” hurts the middle class. Gingrinch wants America off food stamps and on paychecks. Romney said half the jobs created in Texas were filled by illegals.

IMMIGRATION: Texan Ron Paul said a fence is not the answer to illegal immigration. We worry more about the Afghan and Pakistan borders than our own, Paul said, and need to bring our National Guards home so they can guard our borders. Perry blamed the federal government for failing to secure the 1,200 mile Texas border, and for the huge number of illegals looking for jobs. Businesses who hire illegals ought to be penalized, Perry said. He does not want to repeal the 14th Amendment as to citizenship by birth. A fence could be built, Perry said, but it would take 15 years and 30 billion. He instead recommended strategic fencing where it matters, and predator drones to direct boots on the ground. Perry accused Romney of hiring illegals to work on his property, but Romney denied it, saying it’s hard to know if lawn care contractors employ illegals. When he learned they hired illegals, they were let go. Perry also accused Romney of offering amnesty to aliens. Romney said Perry was the one open to amnesty, and accused him of creating a magnet by giving aliens a $100,000 tuition credit, a practice that must end. We must stop employer magnets by enforcing E-Verify. Romney also said 4.5 million want to come here legally in an orderly way. He said Perry’s Texas had a 60% increase in illegal immigration, while California and Florida had none. Cain would build a fence and have it electrified. He would promote a path to citizenship, and shut the back door, so people could come in the front door. He wants to empower states. Bachmann accused Obama’s aunt and uncle of being illegal aliens. She took a pledge to build a wall, saying illegals cost 113 billion a year. She would also enforce English as the official language. She said they cross the border to have anchor babies and the welfare that come with it. Gingrich said to 50 million Latinos, not all of whom are illegal, that America is the most open nation to immigration in history.

ENERGY: Paul said it’s wrong for 49 states to dump nuclear garbage in Nevada. Romney said Nevadans should have the final say and not have it jammed down their throats.  He wants energy independence, using our own natural resources. France gets 70% of their energy from nuclear power, Perry said. He wants 1.2 million people working on energy. We shouldn’t rely on OPEC, saying we should be energy independent. We need not subsidize energy. Gingrich wants a safe way of take care of nuclear waste.

HEALTH CARE: Paul said we need more medical competition. Americans should be allowed to opt out of Obama’s health care. Bachmann said even the Obama Administration realized they cannot afford Long Term Care. Santorum said Obama failed to focus on the cost of health care, which is the real problem. He said Romney has no credibility, since Obama’s plan was basically his. Romney called Obama’s plan unconstitutional, which should be repealed, as it is a huge burden on the economy. He would turn Medicare over to the states. He said his plan for Mass. was not for the entire nation. The idea of the individual mandate came from Gingrich, Romney said. His state relied on private insurers. The uninsured got private not government insurance. When it comes to knowledge about health care, Romney said I am the doctor. Gingrich admitted supporting the individual mandate in opposition to Hillarycare, but the Heritage Foundation came up with the idea. He said a small business is Mass. is being ordered to pay a fine of $3,000 for not paying $750 month in premiums.

TAXES: Cain tried to defend his 999 tax plan, which would impose a 9% federal sales tax and repeal all tax breaks. He argued it would remove all hidden income taxes in goods and services, and was not a value-added tax, but a single tax, which was revenue neutral. He failed to convince anyone it would not raise taxes on those making the least. Bachmann, a tax lawyer, also wants to abolish the tax code, but said Cain’s 999 plan would destroy the economy. She warned if Congress was given a new sales tax, it would never go away. She argued it would be applied against products at every stage of production. Everyone should pay taxes, she said, even if it is only $1. Santorum said 84% of Americans would pay more under Cain’s plan, which eliminates all deductions and exemptions. Getting rid of deductions would mean those with home mortgages would pay more, and people with three children would pay the same tax as a single man. He favored cutting the tax rate for manufacturing to zero. Perry, whose state already has a 6.25% sales tax, said Nevada’s is 8%, and New Hampshire’s is 0%, but no state wanted a 9% federal sales tax; they want flatter and fairer taxes. Romney said to a cheering crowd, Nevada does not want a 9% federal sales tax on top of an 8% state sales tax.  Paul opposes Cain’s plan, because it is regressive and increase taxes. He would replace income taxes with nothing. Gingrich wants to reduce capital gains taxes to zero.

RELIGION: Perry disagreed with the pastor who said Mormonism is a cult. Romney said the Founders appreciated the Freedom of Religion. The Founders went to great length to create a nation with a Constitution that respected all.

10/18/2011

Bachmann Is No Commander-in-Chief

Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann is not fit to serve as the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, because she has no statewide, national, or worldly experience, little knowledge of international law, and several incorrect views on foreign policy.

While she opposed the military operation that President Obama successfully prosecuted in Libya, claiming no American interests were involved, she remains overly willing to engage in armed conflict in Iran, even though there is no evidence they are building a bomb, or pose any credible threat to the U.S.

Bachmann has obviously not studied Middle East history, because she criticized President Obama for suggesting a Palestinian peace plan that would require Israel to withdraw to the pre-1967 borders, and give up lands illegally occupied for 44 years.

Bachmann lives in the past, as she still sees Cuba as a sponsor of global militarism of the sort used during the Cold War, even though the Soviet Union dissolved 20 years ago, and Cuba no longer receives any weapons or instructions from Russia.

Bachmann incorrectly concludes the elimination of Osama bin Laden had something to do with our mistreatment of prisoners at Guantanamo, and worse yet, she shows little or no regard for the Geneva Conventions, and international law, as she thinks the U.S. somehow has a special god-given right to engage in torture.

Bachmann’s Evangelical religious views make her unqualified in an era when we need a President who will take on fundamentalist viewpoints all across the globe. We need one who believes no government should ever establish a religion. Bachmann’s problem is she would interject religion in politics, and not separate the two.

We need a President like Obama who supports democracy against the rule of tyrants, such as Gaddafi in Libya. Our next leader must not be a sucker for fabricated proofs of the sort that drew President Bush into Iraq. He must understand special interests are right now trying to trump up another phony case for war, this time against Iran. We need a candidate with courage to broker a peace in the Mideast, which means not blindly taking Israel’s side, but rather considering the views of the Palestinians. Our next leader must respect international law, and understand that if we torture, our soldiers will likely be subjected to do the same abuse.

Since Michelle Bachmann is not a person who will ever be fit to serve as Commander-in-Chief, the Republicans should not advance her cause any further. If they do, all Americans should be prepared to rally to her defeat, whether she runs in 2012 as a Presidential candidate, or as a Vice-Presidential sidekick.

09/26/2011

Palestine: Abbas Seeks Statehood In UN

Although the UN should grant the Palestinian application for statehood, submitted by President Abbas on Sep. 23, 2011, it will most certainly be vetoed in the Security Council by the U.S., because this is what the Israeli Lobby wants.

Abbas nevertheless made a plea to the UN, by reminding the world the Palestinians have been the victims of injustice since 1948. Although the Palestinians want a comprehensive peace, the last round of negotiations in 2010 broke down within weeks, because Israel disregards UN Resolutions, rejects international law, and continues to settle in parts of occupied Palestine.

Abbas reminded the UN that the late Yasser Arafat of the Palestinian Liberation Organization signed a statement of principle with Israel, in Oslo and at the White House in 1993, but after 18 years, no Palestinian State has yet been created, despite an international consensus for a two-state solution.

Abbas said the absence of an agreement is because Israel systematically confiscates land and constructs settlements along the West Bank and East Jerusalem, while refusing to allow the Palestinians to build. Israel erected an annexation Wall through the West Bank, which separates Palestinian communities. They made Gaza a virtual prison, by imposing a blockade around it. They engaged in ethnic cleansing, by deporting Palestine’s elected representatives, and have allowed Jewish settlers to engage in acts of violence against Arabs without consequence.

It has been difficult for the Palestinians, said Abbas, who was personally forced from his home in 1948, with just the cloths on his back, and the things he could carry. Palestinians eventually realized they could never obtain an absolute justice regarding the historical injustice imposed upon them. They instead adopted a path to relative justice. They made major concessions by agreeing to compromise for only 22% of historical Palestine.

Abbas said the Palestinians have repeatedly tried to negotiate with Israel, but it is now futile. After 63 years of suffering, Abbas said, enough is enough, and business as usual cannot continue. Although Abbas said peaceful resistance will continue, as long as the occupation remains, the Palestinians are willing to return to the table, if Israel stops creating new settlements in Palestine.

Abbas said the Palestinians are entitled to an independent state in the West Bank and Gaza, with East Jerusalem as their capital. They want a release all political prisoners. They want refugees dealt with in accordance with UN Res 194. In exchange, they will renounce violence and reject terrorism in all forms, including state terrorism, and they will agree not to delegitimize Israel.

Abbas asked the UN: Are you going to permit the world’s last occupation to go on forever? Are you going to allow Israel to remain above the law, and let them continue to reject UN Resolutions, and the rulings of the International Court of Justice?

Abbas said it is time for the Palestinian Spring and for the Palestinians to gain independence. Accordingly, Abbas exercised the right of the Palestinian to self-determination and submitted an application for full membership to the Assembly, which he asked the UN to grant immediately, based on the June 4, 1967 borders.

09/23/2011

Palestinian Statehood In United Nations

The UN currently has 194 independent member states. Although the Palestinian Territory is not now an independent sovereign, the United Nations has the power to recognize them, and to make them a UN member. Palestine’s request for statehood would give them rights, and the ability to make claims in international courts. It would allow them to enter into treaties with other countries, and would make them subject to international obligations.

The criteria for statehood were set forth in the Montevideo Convention on Rights and Duties of States (1933). A state must have: 1) a permanent population; 2) a defined territory; 3) a government; and 4) a capacity to enter into relations with others.

As to population, although Antarctica has temporary visitors, it has no permanent population, and is the best example of a land that cannot become a state. The Vatican cannot become a state, since no one was born there, and it has no permanent residents. Western Sahara, with roving nomads, also fails in this regard.

Since Palestine has had a permanent population for over a thousand years, it clearly meets the first criteria for statehood.

A state must have a defined territory. Not all places with defined territories are independent states. Taiwan is a well-defined island that acts like a free state, but it is part of China. French-speaking Quebec has borders, but it is a Canadian province.

In the case of Palestine, their territories include at least the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem. Other lands occupied since 1967 may also be claimed. Although the boundaries with Israel are now disputed, that is no bar to statehood, and the second test is met.

A state must have a government, as every nation must speak with one voice. If Somalia had to re-apply for statehood today, they would have a problem, because they are governed by warlords, and not by a central government.

Palestine has long had elected governmental bodies in the West Bank and Gaza. Despite Israel’s disapproval of the freely-elected Hamas Party in Gaza, Palestine satisfies the third element.

A state must have the capacity to enter into relations with other nations. Palestine certainly has the ability to do this, and it therefore meets the fourth element of statehood.

The people of the occupied Palestinian territories have a right to self-determination under the UN Charter and the United Nations should proceed to recognize a Palestinian State.

09/22/2011

Palestine: Shot Down By Israeli Lobby

Although an independent Palestinian State should be recognized, it is not going to happen, because the U.S. has veto power in the United Nations, and the Israeli Lobby controls American foreign policy, as outlined in the book: The Israeli Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy (2007), by John Mearsheimer and Stephan Walt.

Palestine, 95% Arab in 1893, had been occupied by Palestinians for 1,300 continuous years. After WWI, European Jews started migrating to Palestine, and eventually created a state by removing Palestinians. The UN partitioned Palestine into Arab and Jewish areas in 1947, triggering a Civil War (1947-48), followed by an Arab-Israeli War (1948-49). Jewish forces drove 700,000 Palestinians out at that time, and barred them from returning.

Under President Eisenhower, U.S. foreign policy took a middle course in the 1950s, as Israeli requests to buy military equipment were denied. In the Suez War (1956), Israel was persuaded to return to their borders, when the U.S. threatened to cut off aid.

A major shift in U.S. foreign policy occurred after the 1967 Arab-Israeli War, when the U.S. first started favoring Israel. In 1967, another 100,000 to 250,000 Palestinians were driven from their homes, as Israel started occupying the West Bank, Jerusalem, and Gaza. 3.8 million Palestinians fell under Israeli rule. Although the Israeli Army withdrew from Gaza in 2005, it became a virtual prison, as the Jewish state controls their air, sea, and land access.

Israel came under worldwide criticism for their brutal behavior in the occupied territories. Although Congress legally barred Israel from using U.S. aid to build settlements, new roads and villages were constructed in Palestine, as Israel erected a Wall through it.

The issue now is whether Israel and the U.S. will finally recognize a Palestinian State, along the pre-1967 borders? The short answer is no. The reason is the Israeli Lobby controls the U.S. Congress.

The Lobby first of all shapes public discourse in the U.S. media. They help sympathetic journalists get jobs, and make sure Israel is portrayed favorably. The mainstream media is biased in favor of Israel. They permit no Arab view, or open discussions as to Israel.

The Lobby effectively determines who will mount successful campaigns for Congress, by funneling money to their campaigns through a network of 75 organizations, and no less than 51 pro-Israeli Political Action Committees (PACs). PAC money is essential, since elections are expensive. Money rolls in to those with the pro-Israel label. Candidates must state an unconditional support for Israel to receive funds. They receive in-depth briefings on Israel, are told what words to use, and what opinions to give.

The Lobby punishes politicians who do not support their agenda. No aspiring candidate publically criticizes Israel. Democrats and Republicans alike fear the Lobby. Congress does what they want, as they keep track of voting. Office holders who do not agree are defeated. Those who wish to reduce Israeli aid are called anti-Israel. Jimmy Carter, who did more for Israeli than any other President, said it is political suicide to even mildly criticize Israel. Carter’s book Palestine Peace Not Apartheid, critical of Israel, received full page attacks. It happened to Carter; no one is safe.

The Lobby influences who receives appointed jobs. People critical of Israel do not get foreign policy positions. They make sure Israel is not attacked on Capitol Hill. No critic of Israel is ever heard in Committee. Arab viewpoints are banned.

The Lobby tries to convince Americans that U.S. and Israeli interests are the same. They claim their fight against terrorism is our fight. They want Israel to be treated like a 51st state. They force Congress to pass resolutions favorable to Israel. One said: “the U.S. and Israel are now engaged in a common struggle against terrorism.” It passed in the House 352-21 and the Senate 94-2. When votes are taken to reaffirm support for Israel, almost all members of Congress vote as the Lobby directs.

The Lobby sees to it Israel receives billions in economic aid annually, even though they are not poor. They have been the largest recipient of U.S. foreign aid since 1976. They receive lump sum transfers, and do not have to account for how they spend it. Israeli bonds receive favorable treatment under U.S. law.

The Lobby maintains Israel’s dominant military power in the Mideast. The U.S. 6th Fleet is used for the benefit of Israel. Israel receives access to U.S. reconnaissance and intelligence. They receive tanks, planes, and other military hardware. The Lobby favors a hawkish unilateral exercise of U.S. power. They want to maintain a U.S. presence in the Mideast, in places like Iraq. They want large numbers of U.S.  troops permanently stationed there.

The Lobby controls the U.S. veto power in the United Nations. Between 1972 and 2006, the U.S. vetoed 42 Security Council resolutions critical of Israel.

The Lobby does not want an independent Palestinian state, as they prefer occupation to peace. Anyone favoring a Palestinian state is denounced for betraying Israel. Israel indefinitely removed the idea of a Palestinian state from their agenda.

But change is possible: 1) Those who understand the history of Palestine must educate Americans; 2) The U.S. must establish public financing of federal elections to remove money from the system; 3) The U.S. must deal with the Palestinian issue, because terrorism is related to American support for Israel; 4) Israel must be treated like any other country; 5) If they refuse to settle the Palestinian issue, U.S. economic and military aid must be cut; 6) Israel must dismantle their settlements, end the occupation in the Palestinian territories, and create a Palestinian state.

09/21/2011

Palestine: Queen Noor’s Jordanian View

Queen Noor, born in the U.S. in 1951 and educated at Princeton, married the late King Hussein of Jordan in 1977, at age 26, and after his death, she commented on Palestine in her book, Queen Noor, Leap of Faith, Memoirs of an Unexpected Life (2003).

The Queen noted Palestinians have lived in Palestine for thousands of years. When Britain seized Palestine in WWI, Sir Arthur Balfour promised to create a home there for the Jews of Europe. Although Balfour stated: “nothing shall be done that may prejudice the civil and religious rights of the existing non-Jewish communities of Palestine,” the late King Hussein of Jordan called the Balfour Declaration (1917), “the root cause of all of the bitterness and frustration in our Arab world today.”

After WWII, the West alone determined the fate of Palestine, since much of the world was under colonial rule. UN Res. 181 (1947) partitioned Palestine into Arab and Jewish areas, triggering a civil war, because the Jews received 55% of the land, even though they had just 33% of the population. After Israel declared independence in 1948, their forces went house to house to drive the Palestinians out. Roughly 800,000 Palestinians were forcibly uprooted, as Israel took 78% of the land originally assigned to the Arabs. Palestinians fled to Gaza, the West Bank, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon. Homeless Palestinians lived in caves and makeshift tents, during the winter of 1948-49.

As the Israeli Air Force launched another Arab-Israeli War with a surprise attack against the Arab states in 1967, Jerusalem and the West Bank were occupied. Israel solidified their control of all of Palestine, as another 400,000 Palestinians became refugees. UN Res. 242 criticized Israel saying no land can be acquired by aggression, and ordered a “withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict.” Israel responded by naively suggesting the Palestinians be absorbed by Arab states.

Israel then destroyed Palestinian villages in the Jordan River Valley and built their own settlements, in violation of the Geneva Conventions and international law. By 1991, 100,000 Jews had settled in the occupied territories and 127,000 in East Jerusalem. Prime Minister Netanyahu lifted a ban on Jewish settlements in the 1990s, approved of more homes in the Jordan Valley, and stopped withdrawing troops from Hebron, where 130,000 Palestinians lived. He created a ring of settlements around Arab East Jerusalem, and precipitated another crisis by approving thousands of additional housing units on 425 acres of expropriated Palestinian land, between Jerusalem and Bethlehem. The UN Assembly again found Israel had violated international law.

Although the Palestinians are entitled to a return of the occupied territories and to an independent state, Israel continues to resist. The Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) agreed back in 1985 already to recognize Israel’s right to exist, if they would only accept Res. 242, which requires a withdrawal to the pre-1967 borders. For years however, neither Israel nor the U.S. would even negotiate. The two sides did not sit down together until 1991, when the PLO and Israel agreed to some things in Oslo, but failed to address refugees, settlements, security, and borders. They subsequently signed a Wye Memorandum in 1994, but did not resolve issues as to refugees, Jerusalem, and a Palestinian State.

Over the years, Queen Noor called President Carter one of the most knowledgeable and balanced voices on the region’s search for peace, but said the U.S. as a whole has a fundamental lack of understanding of the Middle East, and is unpopular in the Arab world, because of an unflinching support for Israel. Americans are blind, because the U.S. media only broadcasts the Israeli perspective. The Israeli Lobby exerts tremendous power in the U.S., which explains why Congress passes resolutions favorable to Israel. While the U.S. pays lip service to UN resolutions demanding an end to the settlements, they do nothing about it. While almost all UN members routinely vote against Israel, the U.S. is usually one of the only two votes in opposition.

It is time to recognize a Palestinian State. Nothing new is required as the UN could enforce UN Res. 181, which in 1947 partitioned British-ruled Palestine into Jewish and Arab states.

09/20/2011

Palestine: What Pat Buchanan Thinks

Commentator Pat Buchanan’s book Where the Right Went Wrong (2004) includes a section on U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East, which served as a basis for this article about Palestine.

Buchanan’s book explains that during WWI, British Lord Balfour decreed: “his Majesty’s government looks with favor upon the establishment of a homeland for the Jews in Palestine.” After the British Army seized Palestine from Turkey in 1917, they received a mandate from the League of Nations to govern it, and remained until militant Jews, in the Stern Gang and Irgun, used terrorist tactics to drive them out in 1948.

After Israeli independence in 1948, and particularly since the 1967 Arab-Israeli War, negative feelings about the U.S. rose to new highs in the Islamic world. Americans need to listen to what they say about us so we can learn why they hate us.

Arab and Islamic peoples universally resent our one-sided reflexive support for Israel. We use a double standard when dealing with Israel and Arabs. We give Israel aid, but allow them to defy UN Resolutions, seize Arab land, and deny Palestinian rights. Americans are not hated for who we are; we are hated for what we do. It is not our principles, but rather our policies.

When President Bush took power in 2001, the Neo-Cons, many of whom were Jewish-American with strong emotional ties to Israel, were put in charge of U.S. Middle East Policy. Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle saw U.S. and Israeli interests as the same. Since Israel was unable to remove threats to their homeland, they wanted the U.S. to disarm their neighboring states. They wanted America to establish permanent military bases in the Mideast.

The U.S. was attacked on 911, because our Foreign Policy supports Israel and the fundamentalist Likud regime. Buchanan said: the terrorists of 911 came over here, because we were over there. Since Israel and the U.S. could not be confronted directly, terrorism was used, as it is the only weapon they had.

The Palestinian case must be resolved, because as Buchanan said, no amount of force can keep an unwilling population in subjugation indefinitely. Unless we change, we are headed for endless conflict in the Islamic world.

While Israel must withdraw to the pre-1967 borders, the problem is America is no longer an honest broker, because we sit with Israel and have a compulsive need to provide their defense. The U.S. has embraced a neo-imperial pro-Israeli foreign policy the Founding Fathers would have seen as a breach of faith.

The U.S. needs to pull back from the Middle East, Buchanan said. We must stop volunteering to fight their wars, since such a foreign policy does not serve our interests. He said America needs a foreign policy made in the United States, and not in Tel-Aviv, or at the American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

09/12/2011

911: Are We Still Missing The Boat?

On the 10th Anniversary of Sept. 11, while the broadcast media repeatedly showed videos of planes crashing into buildings, along with survivor interviews and memorials, they failed once again to seriously examine why 911 happened in the first place.

Americans have no trouble recalling 911. They are painfully aware of the airport and government security measures implemented since then, and know international communications and finance are now under surveillance.

What they still do not know, however, because no one has explained it to them, is why 20, mostly Saudi Arabians, hijacked four airplanes on Sep. 11, 2001, and set out to crash them into buildings, for the purpose of killing as many us as possible.

Until we learn what motivated the attackers, we will never understand the enemy, or eliminate the threat they pose. While the Transportation Security Agency (TSA) may take some small security measures at home, they will never make us completely safe, since they do not address the root causes of the problem.

So what was it that bothered the 911 attackers so much that they were willing to become kamikaze pilots? The answer begins with our one-sided bi-partisan U.S. foreign policy that blindly supports Israel, and angers many Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims.

Americans would be safer at home if we stopped supplying Israel with weapons that end up killing Palestinians. We would be safer if our Navy abandoned the Mediterranean and Persian Gulf. We would be safer if we withdrew all of our ground forces from Iraq, Afghanistan, and other locations in the Mideast and Persian Gulf.

Since the special interests that finance our political campaigns are not going to support candidates willing to withdraw from the Mideast, the U.S. is not going to stop angering the nations of Islam. Consequently, more enemies will unintentionally be recruited, and more will eventually succeed in doing harm to us.

Once we understand every event has a cause, and know why Sep. 11 occurred, we can eliminate the factors that led to it, and only then return to a secure environment, free of the fear of another 911.

08/15/2011

Paul Wins Foreign Policy Debate (8-11-11)

Congressman Ron Paul, unelectable as a Presidential candidate due to his extreme views on the economy, was however a lone voice of sanity on foreign policy issues, and a shining star among the Republicans at the Iowa Straw Poll Debate on Aug. 11, 2011.

MIDEAST: Paul, the only military vet on stage, courageously said it is time to bring U.S. troops home from Afghanistan, Iraq, and other places. America’s wars have been costing trillions, Paul said, and the U.S. has to stop spending so much money on them.

AFGHANISTAN: Former Mass. Gov. Mitt Romney, most likely to be the nominee, incorrectly said Afghans are now free from the Taliban. He then adopted a weak position for an aspiring commander-in-chief, by pledging to follow the lead of the generals, which is code for not withdrawing from abroad. Former Minnesota Gov. Plawenty said we were justified in going into Afghanistan, but also offered little hope for the future, saying the effort there was still worth it.

IRAN: When former Penn. Sen. Santorum said Iran first became our enemy in 1979, Paul had to give him a history lesson, saying the U.S. started the rift when we meddled in their internal affairs and overthrew their leader in 1953. Paul also had to explain to Gov. Pawlenty that Iran wants nuclear weapons as a defense against their well armed neighbors, who already have the bomb, such as: Israel, Pakistan, and Russia. Paul correctly pointed out that Iran is no threat to the U.S. Minnesota Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann, a bombastic hot-headed extremist, who should never herself have a finger on the trigger, ironically promised to make sure Iran didn’t get the bomb. When Pawlenty suggested the U.S. impose sanctions against Iran, Paul warned that they could provoke yet another war, and he again had to educate the Governor, saying such measures did not work in the past against states like Cuba. Paul added it is time to end our 50-year old trade embargo against the island-nation.

BIN LADEN: None of the Republican candidates congratulated the Obama Administration for successfully eliminating Osama Bin Laden. Bachmann instead offered the incorrect view that our poor treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo had something to do with it.

ARAB SPRING: With regards to the Arab Spring, Pawlenty criticized Obama for not demanding the departure of Syrian leader Assad. Former Congressman Gingrich said he would not have intervened in Libya, and we have to rethink our strategy in the entire region.

SHARIA LAW: Herman Cain, who never held a public office, and was in the debate only because the Republicans needed a black face on stage, received ridiculous applause from the partisan audience, as he promised to remove Sharia Law from U.S. Courts, a problem that doesn’t even exist.

ISRAEL: Cain also pandered to the Israeli Lobby, saying Iran wants to wipe Israel off the map, and Pawlenty did the same, by baselessly accusing Obama of sticking a thumb in Israel’s eye.

CHINA: With respect to Asia, former Utah Gov. Huntsman, who served as Ambassador to China, said a President should know something about the Peoples Rep., and the U.S. needed a dialog with them.

IMMIGRATION: As to immigration, Paul again led the charge saying we should stop paying attention to Afghan borders, and instead worry about our own. Huntsman, in favor of securing U.S. borders, was reluctant to send all illegal aliens home. Romney simply promised to crack down on immigration, but of course gave no specifics. Gingrich said secure the borders, and make English our official language. Cain had the worst response of all, promising to empower each state to develop 50 separate immigration policies.

FOREIGN POLICY: Paul is the only candidate to articulate a clear foreign policy, which is to withdraw from foreign wars. He understands the Persian Gulf and Mideast far better than his opponents. Huntsman was reasonable for a Republican. Romney sounded like another weak leader, like George W. Bush, as he would let others control foreign policy. Bachmann, Gingrich, Santorum and Cain were frankly too frightening to even consider as president.