OpEdNews Op Eds

A MAD Foreign Policy: America's Irrational Defense of Israel

By       Message Robert Weitzel     Permalink
      (Page 1 of 2 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) ; ; , Add Tags  (less...) Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It


Author 3926
Become a Fan
  (2 fans)
- Advertisement -

"My number one priority in foreign policy is to protect Israel."-

-Former House Speaker Richard Armey-

Rocky was a boyhood friend. He was as big and as strong as his name. In his wild days, Rocky hung out with a runt whose obnoxious mouth regularly got my friend into serious bar fights. One night Rocky was beaten senseless when he stepped between the runt and someone with dangerous friends. I never understood his irrational defense of a guy with obvious "needs."-

But then""K Street realpolitik notwithstanding""I have difficulty understanding America's irrational defense of Israel, a country whose "needs"- are as much at odds with the security of my country as were the runt's "needs"- at odds with the health of my friend.

Earlier this month 7,000 activists and politicians attended the America Israel Public Forum Committee's 2008 Policy Conference in Washington D.C. This was AIPAC's premier pro-Israel event, which attracted a bipartisan who's who of Congressional sycophants. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's keynote address drew nearly half the members of Congress.

Along with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, both presumptive Democratic and Republican presidential candidates bent a knee and lowered their head in supplication, pledging an unwavering fealty along with an additional 30 billion taxpayer dollars in military aid to Israel.

John McCain told attendees, "The threats to Israel's security are large and growing and America's commitment must grow as well. I strongly support the increase in military aid to Israel . . . our shared interests and values are too great for us to follow any other policy."-

Barak Obama dittoed, "Israel's security is sacrosanct. It is non-negotiable . . . Our alliance is based on shared interests and shared values. Those who threaten Israel threaten us . . . as president I will never compromise when it comes to Israel's security."-

- Advertisement -

As an American citizen, I'd like to think the number one "non-negotiable"- of anyone who would be president is the security and the interests of the American people. Instead of reading from the same AIPAC-vetted script, McCain and Obama would better serve their country by reading from the same Constitution""the version enshrined in Washington D.C. not in Jerusalem.

AIPAC is the most powerful of the dozen or so major organizations and think-tanks that comprise the "Israel lobby"- in the United States. This influential lobby dictates U.S. Middle East foreign policy: "You can't have an Israeli policy other than what AIPAC gives you around here,"- admitted Senator Ernest Hollings (D-SC) upon leaving office in 2004.

Recently, former President Jimmy Carter pointed out that the Israel lobby makes or breaks American politicians depending on their willingness to promote Israel's "security"- as their number one foreign policy priority: "It's almost political suicide . . . for a member of Congress who wants to seek reelection to take any stand that might be interpreted as anti-policy of the conservative Israeli government."-

Predictably, politicians wanting to keep their government and K Street paychecks merrily dance the mizinka, the Jewish traditional marriage (of convenience) polka.

Most detrimental to the democratic process, however, is the way the lobby manages the political and social discourse by tarring critics of Israel's policies and actions regarding the Palestinians, Gaza and the West Bank with the brush of anti-Semitism, a black epithet that once applied is difficult, if not impossible, to scrub off.

- Advertisement -

But does our "non-negotiable"- support for Israel make us more secure, or is it a MAD policy akin to the insane Cold War strategy of "mutual assured destruction?"- Such a strategy may, in the war on terror between "radical Islam"- and "freedom-loving democracies,"- result in the mutual assured destruction of both the United States and Israel.

A Pentagon Defense Science Board report published in 2004 concluded, "Muslims do not "-hate our freedom,' but rather they hate our policies."- And the policy that motivates their young men to bring the Middle East conflict to America by crashing passenger planes into the most prominent symbols of our affluence and military might is our "non-negotiable,"- irrational support for the policies of Israel's right-wing government.

In 2003 it was in Israel's national security interest to see Saddam Hussein and his perceived regional threat disappear, and to let the American military do the killing and the dying to ensure that it vanished. It was never about American security. Period!

Next Page  1  |  2


- Advertisement -

View Ratings | Rate It

Biography: Robert Weitzel is a contributing editor to Media With a Conscience (www.mwcnews.net). His essays regularly appear in The Capital Times in Madison, WI.

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

Go To Commenting

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
- Advertisement -

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

The Second American Civil War: A Middle Class Divided

Nader and McKinney: "Wasting" a Vote for Lincoln's "Radical" Ideal

The Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act: A Tutorial in Orwellian Newspeak

Cluster Bombs: The Realpolitik of U.S. Foreign Policy

Focus on the Family's Toxic Corn Pone Letter From 2012

Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris: The Unholy Trinity . . .Thank God.