Monday, December 11, 2006

Olmert as Dr. Strangelove and Other Nuclear Idiocy; Steyn: Chamberlain meets Oprah

Olmert as Dr. Strangelove and Other Nuclear Idiocy
Channeling Peter Sellers as Dr. Strangelove, Olmert left jaws agape on German TV by lifting the ambiguity veil that had served Israel so well in its "do they or don't they have nuclear weapons" scenario, by admitting yes we have nukes and then telling everyone why we're not like Iran in a sort of Geo-politics 101 lecture. It seems Olmert was hellbent to make Manhigut Yehudit's case for faith-based leadership a slam-dunk, and to allow new US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to push Israel off the cliff. Gates, at his confirmation hearing, was all too eager to tell Congress, yes Israel has nuclear weapons.

Stabbed in the Back by Gates et al
As pointed out on Debka, "Gates and James Baker are pursuing a new policy line which sacrifices the traditional US-Israeli alliance for the sake of wooing Iran, Syria and Iraq’s neighbors for help in Iraq. During his senate hearings, Gates confirmed - and indirectly justified - Iran’s quest for a nuclear weapon by declaring that the Islamic Republic Iran wants the power of deterrence against “the nuclear countries surrounding them – Pakistan in the east, Russia in the north, Israel in the west and the United States in the Persian Gulf. "

Gates also said that “If Iran obtains nuclear weapons no one can promise it would not use them against Israel.”

Some Washington pundits accused the co-chairman of the Iraq Study Group, James Baker, as forcing President George W. Bush to resort to dealing with the Iraqi Shiite-led government for the sake of an orderly US exit from Iraq. The price offered is acceptance that Iran could go nuclear within two years at Israel’s expense.

The group’s recommendation of a Madrid-2 peace conference for a Middle East peace would pander to the Arabs and their European backers by pushing for a full Israeli withdrawal from territories captured in the 1967 war. Israel and its supporters in the United States would have no say – “…a unique opportunity for the US to strike a deal without Jewish pressure,” as one Washington observer put it.

This sort of crude language has not been heard in Washington’s top circles since George Bush the elder was president and James Baker his secretary of state.

The new-old gang has also revived the threat of an imposed “peace.” It is barely veiled in the Baker-Hamilton report’s statement: “The US cannot achieve its goals in the Middle East unless it embarks on a renewed and sustained commitment to a comprehensive peace plan on all fronts.”

The prime minister’s office in Jerusalem still clings to the now-meaningless statement that there is “no fear of a change in US policy towards Israel.” Click here to read the story.

Amazing. Just when I think that there's no lower Kadima/trash can fall, surprises like this show that new levels of hell can be reached with minimal effort. And all this as the man that the FBB (fabulous Baker boy) et al would like to "engage" was busy hosting a holocaust denial conference.

Steyn: Chamberlain meets Oprah
From the brilliant word processor of Mark Steyn: "So there you have it: an Iraq "Support Group" that brings together the Arab League, the European Union, Iran, Russia, China and the UN. And with support like that who needs lack of support? It worked in Darfur, where the international community reached unanimous agreement on the urgent need to rent a zeppelin to fly over the beleaguered region trailing a big banner emblazoned "YOU'RE SCREWED." For Dar4.1, they can just divert it to Baghdad.

Oh, but lest you think there are no minimum admission criteria to James Baker's "Support Group," relax, it's a very restricted membership: Arabs, Persians, Chinese Commies, French obstructionists, Russian assassination squads. But no Jews. Even though Israel is the only country to be required to make specific concessions — return the Golan Heights, etc. Indeed, insofar as this document has any novelty value, it's in the Frankenstein-meets-the-Wolfman sense of a boffo convergence of hit franchises: a Vietnam bug-out, but with the Jews as the designated fall guys. Wow. That's what Hollywood would call "high concept." Click here for the full article.

Yep, "F**k the Jews" lives on....

Click here to rate this post on JBlog


Anonymous said...

You could look at this setup as the end of Israel...or its opposite. What if something completely different happened?

I found it interesting that Reuven Koret (Israel Insider, Jewlicious) wrote an article last week titled "The Case for Declaring an Independent Judea." This isn't his usual style and, of course, I am curious.

What does Manhigut Yehudit think about joining such an effort?

Jason Gold-Editor said...

To Chava:

Dunno. WIll pass on to the boys and get back to you.


Anonymous said...

every time for the past many months feiglin ever spoke in public specifically showing himself and the movement for public statements hes been critisizing brilliantly some fool abt some foolish thing he said
its a waste of time and very petty
its called getting caught in the tit for tat about the comical ideas that are expressed in israel by the current leadership why get bogged down by the daily tit for tat stupidity thats going on its soo easy to critisize why doesnt he come out to make a positive statement about something that makes people smile fresh air and compels them to make a difference around them hes representing jewish leadership standing up in the world and showing a new way of exsisting and reason to live as jews as humans the idea of jewish leadership alone carries thousands of people and resources but is mr feiglin the man for the job does he carry enough ummph and clarity to push the way forward
or are we feeling fuffilled and making a difference by getting caught in the details of aharon barak they say today food packages have too much too dull directions how to use put the trust in the poeple of israel to know whats best u just have to provide the outlet the oppurtunity and the better soul will prevail
if u have any comments of dissagreements i want to hear ure reply especially any pointers about what we as the common man should do i look forward to the updates every week alot!!

Anonymous said...

why r u thinking this madness this isnt the united states this is the land of israel who needs another kings of judah and kings of israel situation sounds like fun break us up more thats even if in theory it would work but the truth is u are denying the unity of the entire inch of the land of israel there is noo such thing as seceding from the union this isnt a start your own party type thing either there is one land of israel and the land of israel is in trouble or we belong back in europe and yes we are in a bind but if we listen to tzaddikim and their clarity we can push forward and that is by building unity ahavat yisroel education tradition we are one unit one category and people like feiglin are providing oppurtunities for all that energy to come forward and accomplishments and better nature but u shouldnt entertain the thought of dividing jews and israel its almost like the disengagement but in a worse way we can brute this any comments or ideas??

Anonymous said...

You talkin' to me, Ezra?

Perhaps you didn't read the article I linked to above; otherwise, you would have noticed that Koret (not Feiglin) was not talking about secession or rebellion. He was talking about having the state of Judea PROTECT Israel and the Jewish people who live there.

In case you haven't noticed, Israel's relations with the world are locked tight in a box and the leadership (both Israeli and American) seems content with leaving them there. Certain behaviors are expected, certain things are understood. The direction seems to be going downhill fast, and nothing seems to stop the progression, let alone reverse it.

It may also be that Manhigut Yehudit is not as able to operate within this environment as well as they would like, so I am merely suggesting that they consider yet another idea I picked up (I did not originate it; I cited my source!). Obviously they don't have to follow it; they can, and should, evaluate what people suggest in context.

I feel this could be a viable alternative in case the Likud option doesn't work out. I'm not married to the idea, but it intrigued me. That's all, period.