SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home Rumor Debunked

FEBRUARY 28, 2011

Rumor Debunked

BY JAMES KIRCHICK

Herzliya, Israel—For years, American neoconservatives have been accused of being lackeys for Israel, namely the Likud party. In 2008, Time’s Joe Klein wrote, “The fact that a great many Jewish neoconservatives—people like Joe Lieberman and the crowd over at Commentary—plumped for [the Iraq] war, and now for an even more foolish assault on Iran, raised the question of divided loyalties: using U.S. military power, U.S. lives and money, to make the world safe for Israel.” In 2004, University of Michigan Professor Juan Cole alleged that there existed a neocon cell within the Bush administration Defense Department, which attempted “to use the Pentagon as Israel’s Gurkha regiment, fighting elective wars on behalf of Tel Aviv.” Google neocons likud and you get over 40,000 results.

But the events in Egypt have laid bare a stark divide between neoconservatives and the Israeli elite: While the former are ecstatic about the fall of Mubarak and the prospect of a democratic Egypt, the latter are wary—at best. “Supporting democracy is part of the genetic code of Americans,” says Martin Kramer, a senior fellow at Jerusalem’s Shalem Center. “Israelis,” on the other hand, “like the status quo.”

Putting pressure on the Middle East’s sclerotic and corrupt governments to liberalize is the touchstone of the U.S. neoconservative foreign policy project, as embodied in the Bush administration’s National Security Strategy of 2002 and made manifest with the war in Iraq. With regard to Egypt, one of the earliest and most persistent critics of the Mubarak regime was Robert Kagan, the preeminent neoconservative intellectual. Over a year ago, Kagan formed a bipartisan Working Group on Egypt that issued a stream of reports and statements warning about the potential for mass volatility in the country. In June, he co-authored a Washington Post op-ed alleging that the White House was “repeating the mistake that Cold War-era administrations made when they supported right-wing dictatorships—right up until the point when they were toppled by radical forces.” “The delegitimizing of Mubarak began with the neocons,” Kramer explains.

So, unsurprisingly, when mass protests erupted in Egypt in January, it did not take long for neoconservatives to come out in support of the demonstrators and trumpet the revolt as a victory for their own point of view. “EGYPT PROTESTS SHOW GEORGE W. BUSH WAS RIGHT ABOUT FREEDOM IN THE ARAB WORLD,” read the headline of an op-ed piece in The Washington Post by Elliot Abrams, who served as a deputy national security advisor in the Bush administration. “Bush’s insight is being vindicated now on the streets of Cairo,” wrote Douglas J. Feith, a former undersecretary of defense. “[T]he West should want this revolution to continue, even if it allows the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood much greater influence,” concluded Reuel Marc Gerecht, a fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and a contributing editor to The Weekly Standard.

Many Israelis, meanwhile, view this talk about democracy and liberalism in Egypt (and the rest of the Arab world, for that matter) as pollyannish. At this month’s Herzliya Conference, an annual gathering of Israel’s defense establishment and security experts from around the world, many Israelis said the overthrow of Mubarak is, above all, the loss of a predictable ally. While he was autocratic, at least he kept up his end of the Camp David Accords for nearly 30 years and held the lid tight on the Muslim Brotherhood. Now, Israelis are worried about the potential rise of the Brotherhood and the threat that, were it to come to power, it might abrogate the accords. In the words of one Israeli official, the accords have served as the “psychological cornerstone” of Israel’s relationship to its Arab neighbors.

What’s more, Israeli skeptics note, the new Egyptian dispensation need not be dominated by the Brotherhood to pose problems for Israel. According to the Israeli analyst Barry Rubin, “Islamism is not the only alternative ideology. There’s an alternative ideology called radical Arab nationalism.” Egyptian nationalists, he says, could make life more difficult for Israel by assisting Hamas in Gaza and, generally, taking a staunchly anti-Western stance.

So how do Israelis worried about the future of Egypt and U.S. neoconservatives view each other at the moment? “There’s a lot naïveté in the American and European expectation to see democratization in the Arab and Muslim world,” said Amnon Lipkin-Shahak, a former chief of staff of the Israeli Defense Force (IDF). Some Israelis have even put these sentiments directly to U.S. neocons. Elliott Abrams says he has received “emails saying, ‘Are you crazy and is Obama crazy? Mubarak is the linchpin of stability of this region’” from “a lot of Israelis in the security establishment.” Meanwhile, Gerecht, who attended the Herzliya conference, characterized the reactions of Israelis there as redolent of pensée unique—an ironic term lampooning the tendency of French intellectual conformity, whereby the “French elite, without any instruction, acts the same way.”

In light of this current debate, the claim that Iraq was a “war for Israel” looks even more specious. Israelis, skeptical about the prospects of Arab democracy, were at best agnostic about the overthrow of Saddam. Whatever his faults, they warned, he was at least an enemy of Iran, which Israel considers a far greater threat to its security. As Danny Ayalon, the former Israeli ambassador to Washington, said at the time, then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon warned Bush, “In terms of culture and tradition, the Arab world is not built for democratization.” In an account provided by The Forward’s Yossi Alpher, “Sharon told Bush, please remember that you will conquer, occupy and leave, but we have to remain in this part of the world. Israel, he reminded the American president, does not wish to see its vital interests hurt by regional radicalization and the spillover of violence beyond Iraq’s borders.”

To be sure, despite their criticisms of the current situation in Egypt and, years ago, the war in Iraq, Israelis are quick to point out that it’s not Arab and Muslim democracy per se that they oppose. Israel would love to be surrounded by democracies—but only if they are genuine democracies with all of the attendant qualities: checks on power, secularism, a free press, and other features that distinguish a truly liberal democracy from an illiberal one. Indeed, Israelis warn that Americans, including neocons, have too narrow a view of what democracy entails. “It seems the Americans don’t understand democracy is something much bigger than free elections,” said Boaz Ganor, founder and the Executive Director of the International Institute for Counter-Terrorism.

Democracy in the Middle East, Ganor and others say, must be about a liberal culture that respects the rights of women and minorities—and acknowledges the presence of a Jewish State. But they are skeptical this is possible anytime soon, in Egypt or elsewhere. “It’s important not to be an Orientalist, to think that we can change the culture of the Middle East,” notes Yaakov Amidror, program director of the Institute for Contemporary Affairs at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs and a former commander of the Israeli Defense Force’s National Defense College. “This turns out to be presumptuous and unrealistic.” A prominent Israeli hawk invoking Edward Said to denounce the core idea behind neoconservative foreign policy: Could there be a starker illustration of just how mistaken the neocon-Israeli conflation always was?

James Kirchick is a New Republic contributing editor and writer at large with Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty based in Prague.

For more TNR, become a fan on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 76 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

76 comments

The neocon devotion to democracy has been largely as a tool to undermine US enemies. For a hostile despotic regime, they think democracy is just the thing. For US clients and such, not so important: Saudi Arabia, Egypt (until it became unstable), Kuwait, various emirates. Israel under the Likud, to no great surprise, takes a similarly realist view. On this occasion, the neocon view of American and Israeli interests seems to have diverged. This proves very little toward Kerchick's thesis. Particularly since it is no great policy leap to applaud the change in Eqypt after it has already occurred, or was substantially likely to, and after the new military government has reaffirmed the treaty with Israel. Anyone wanna guess at the reaction of the neocons if they had signalled that they would repudiate that peace treaty? Regime change, tout de suite.

- roidubouloi

February 28, 2011 at 7:24am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Kirchick's point is well-taken. The Israelis have a right to be skeptical. For them, it's likely more of the same, whether the fashion du jour is Islamism or Arabism. Israel and Jews remain the non-resident bogeymen across the Islamic world. But, tactically, from time to time, there may be opportunities. The neo-cons are in la-la land about the "new" Middle East. They keep declaring America's Iraq adventure a success. Oh, and just throw some more lives and treasure at Afghanistan. Do whatever it takes, even it fails to secure Pakistani nukes or enable oil pipelines from Central Asia to the Indian Ocean. A few rockets at Beersheva the other day? That doesn't matter. Illiberal democracy is springing up all over the place, to be hijacked and crushed by Islamism sooner or later.

- amidut

February 28, 2011 at 8:02am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

As well, although this supposed divide between the neocons and the Likud may reflect it self in a difference in attitude, it does not as far as I know reflect any difference of opinion about what is to be done at present. Itvis all just theatrics, an opportunity for the nEocons to portray themselves after the fact as democratic absolutists, a dog and pony showbthat holds no interest for Israelis. Big deal.

- roidubouloi

February 28, 2011 at 8:31am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I always thought Joe Klein was a non-talented hack, now I see he is an idiot also. I don't remember anytime in history of foreign soldiers fighting for the defense of the Jewish people. Remember WWII, the good war, the Allies were afraid to single out of the Jews as victims least it forment anti-semitism. Tell me why is it a crime for Israel to be concerned about its survival. As for the power of the neo-cons - they don't have any. Iraq had nothing to do with Israel, as for Iran which is a real threat, outside of sanctions don't expect US or NATO troups to do anything. As for Arab nationalism - it was interesting to see the pro-Nasser signs displayed in the Yemen protest. More interesting is the lack of any comment on this.

- jneuberg

February 28, 2011 at 10:24am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

No, the "Domino Theory" of extremist Arab governments falling, and becoming good old USA supporting Democracies, was merely a justification for invading Iraq. Even expressing that theory demonstrated an astonishing amount of wishful thinking, and ignorance of facts on the ground in Iraq. Ascribing that theory as support of Israel is rewriting history. In many of the Arab countries, there's a repressed majority turning to religious theocracy, as an alternative to the inherited minority kingdom rulers. "Successful" implementation of majority rule in those countries results in "One man, one vote, one time" -- and the results will NOT be pro-Western. Or pro-Israeli, for that matter.

- AllanL5

February 28, 2011 at 11:32am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Another scorcher from Ami Isserroff: http://www.zionism-israel.com/israel_news/2011/02/24/viva_mubarak/#more-1042 "But it is bizarre to rewrite the record so Mubarak becomes a friend of Israel, an ally of the United states and a proponent of democracy, instead of a two-faced anti-Semitic despot and promoter of terrorism. It is a gross distortion of history to label Mubarak “Egypt’s Reformer”, and it is certainly a bit of an exaggeration to insist: Hosni Mubarak was a key U.S. ally…By letting his regime fall, Barack Obama has threatened the survival of the Jewish state. With allies like Mubarak, who needs enemies? Israel is not so fragile. We survived Gamal Nasser in 1956 and 1967. We survived King Farouk and we even survived Anwar Sadat’s surprise attack. We survived General Eisenhower and John Foster Dulles and we will survive Barack Obama and whoever replaces Mubarak. In the Middle East, the Much Worse may replace the Very Bad. The next ruler of Egypt may well be worse than Mubarak. That is no reason to rewrite history and make dictators into Good Guys just because they were toppled. Better to leave that sort of thing to the Venezuelan demagogue Hugo Chavez, who twittered, “Viva Gaddaffi!" Israelis are not mourning for Mubarak. But he was the known Devil that Israelis learned to live with. 30 years of relative quiet mean a great deal to Israelis. It's hard to start again, re organizing the country for a future that could see its longest border on the South become available to Hamas operatives and the likes. Anyone who blames Israelis for worrying about the qassams that could be deployed along that border with the blessing of an Egyptian army is simply irrational. I wonder though how fragile the peace treaty is that its survival depends on the whim of the Egyptian people. Why wasn't there some pre-emptive insurance policy against this happening?

- noga1

February 28, 2011 at 11:58am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

“The neocon devotion to democracy has been largely as a tool to undermine US enemies. For a hostile despotic regime, they think democracy is just the thing. For US clients and such, not so important: Saudi Arabia, Egypt (until it became unstable), Kuwait, various emirates. Israel under the Likud, to no great surprise, takes a similarly realist view.” Roidubouloi and the neocons have one thing in common; he is an ideologue just like they are. Ideologues can’t even see what is in front of them. In this case roidubouloi can’t own up that he was wrong about the neocons all along. They are invested in democracy and it wasn’t just a tool to undermine regimes hostile to the US. Their celebration of the demonstration, riots, and rebellions in the Arab world shows just that. The problem with their endorsement of democracy isn’t that it isn’t clear yet that the fall of some tyrants will result in a true democratic society. The political upheavals are far from over. In any case, it must embarrassing for roidubouloi who has always seen the neocons as being only for what was good for the US and Israel and as using democracy merely as a tool to meddle in their affairs to have to admit that he was wrong, that he didn’t understand the neocons any better than he understands President Obama. You can always tell when roidubouloi is wrong; he tends to come up with a string of legalese mumbo jumbo that he probably doesn’t even understand neither.

- Newly84

February 28, 2011 at 1:10pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

“On this occasion, the neocon view of American and Israeli interests seems to have diverged. This proves very little toward Kerchick's thesis. Particularly since it is no great policy leap to applaud the change in Eqypt after it has already occurred, or was substantially likely to, and after the new military government has reaffirmed the treaty with Israel. Anyone wanna guess at the reaction of the neocons if they had signalled that they would repudiate that peace treaty? Regime change, tout de suite.” Roidubouloi this is even more pathetic than usual. He is now accusing the neocons of insincerity. Introducing all kinds of ifs into his faulty reasoning. Roidubouloi you would make a pretty good soldier in some totalitarian system.

- Newly84

February 28, 2011 at 1:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

“But the events in Egypt have laid bare a stark divide between neoconservatives and the Israeli elite: While the former are ecstatic about the fall of Mubarak and the prospect of a democratic Egypt, the latter are wary—at best. “Supporting democracy is part of the genetic code of Americans,” says Martin Kramer, a senior fellow at Jerusalem’s Shalem Center. “Israelis,” on the other hand, “like the status quo.”” James Kirchick is right that there is a strong difference of opinion here, but wrong to assume that the neocons are right and the Israelis wrong: first because the Egyptian upheavals are not over yet and second because democracy isn’t just a matter of overturning a tyrannical regime. There's many a slip 'twixt the cup and the lip.

- Newly84

February 28, 2011 at 1:19pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The "problem" with the upheavals in Egypt et al. is that they are not the product of American instigation. While both Obama and the liberals, and George W. Bush and the neocons, might prefer to see a gradual transition from dictatorship to democracy, with the growth of civil institutions that are essential for Western democracy, that is not possible in the current situation, nor was it possible under the Iraq invasion approach. Israelis are rightly concerned that the newly unfettered Arab governments will become much more hostile to Israel -- Obama and the American neocons are similarly concerned, but they all have to try to manage and guide the process from a great distance. All American presidents in the last 20 years at least have tried to cajole autocrats such as Mubarak and the Kings of Jordan and Saudi Arabia to get in front of the forces of democratization, rather than having those forces push them, but it seems that they never move until the sword is coming down on them. It is certainly humbling and disconcerting for a supposed superpower like the US, or even a regional power like Israel, to see its allies suddenly disappear and its levers of control become less clear and less dependable, but if we are to practice diplomacy in the real world, we must do so with the parties and forces that are available to us.

- rpearson

February 28, 2011 at 1:28pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Roidubouloi this is even more pathetic than usual. He is now accusing the neocons of insincerity." Can anyone imagine such a thing? An insincere neocon? What a shocking thought! No one could possibly discern any hypocrisy in their imagined long history of democratic absolutism that none-the-less did not find it opportune to undermine the Mubarak government or see it crumble until a few days ago and has not, to my knowledge, starting advocating that we undermine the despots in Saudi Arabia. __________________ Newly seems unable to advance a point without including some gratuitous slur in my direction. That is because he is a moron, a true fucking idiot, who has no coherent point to make and somehow thinks that these darts will rescue his otherwise inane commentary from its inanities. One of newly's other favorite pastimes is complaining about posters being attacked by other posters. Yet, as usual, it is he himself who initiates such behavior. In this case, we can observe four such comments directed at me although I have said nothing to or about him and, indeed, he had not previously commented here. It is anyone's guess whether he is a deliberate hypocrite or simply too stupid even to be able to observe his own behavior (let alone control himself). My guess is all of the above.

- roidubouloi

February 28, 2011 at 1:49pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

roidubouloi, didn't take long for you to revert to form. You are the forums Stalin. Too bad for you and great for us that you don't have any real power, here.

- Newly84

February 28, 2011 at 2:36pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Only another moron could buy your hypocritical bullshit, newly. You cry, cry, cry about abuse, but YOU are perennially the first to resort to same as is perfectly clear here, again, for anyone who cares to read. And then you cry, cry, cry some more because you are a weeny little coward. The only proper "form" for thumbsucking morons like you is kicking your sorry little asses until you slink away.

- roidubouloi

February 28, 2011 at 3:19pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Or grow a pair and learn to behave like a civilized human being. I wouldn't want to place any bets on which will be the first to happen.

- roidubouloi

February 28, 2011 at 3:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yup.

- roidubouloi

February 28, 2011 at 5:07pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Roidubouloi’s master piece of insight and civility: “Newly seems unable to advance a point without including some gratuitous slur in my direction. That is because he is a moron, a true fucking idiot, who has no coherent point to make and somehow thinks that these darts will rescue his otherwise inane commentary from its inanities.” “Only another moron could buy your hypocritical bullshit, newly. You cry, cry, cry about abuse, but YOU are perennially the first to resort to same as is perfectly clear here, again, for anyone who cares to read. And then you cry, cry, cry some more because you are a weeny little coward. The only proper "form" for thumbsucking morons like you is kicking your sorry little asses until you slink away.” R would make a great Mid East dictator at least that is what he trying to say to us. These posts are his practice applications.

- Newly84

February 28, 2011 at 5:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"This thread lost its threadness and became a a car crash that one looked at horrifically and irresistibly even while not wanting to." roidubouloi was behind the will when the car crashed.

- Newly84

February 28, 2011 at 5:14pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You just keep trying, newly, but you are still far too stupid to understand what is going on here. Insight, yes. Into what a consummate asshole you are whose efforts to retreat cannot conceal the fact that you are a provocateur whose purpose is to derail threads when the discussion isn't going the way you would like, and, being a moron, you have no way to prevail. I am happy to oblige you when you start down your little abusive track because I don't really care. If the game is civil discourse, fine. Then we can all play civil discourse. If trolls like you want to turn it into something else, fine too. Civility? Hardly. A little masterpiece of incivility that is just right for taking out the garbage like you.

- roidubouloi

February 28, 2011 at 5:23pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

More of roidubouloi's brilliance: "You just keep trying, newly, but you are still far too stupid to understand what is going on here"

- Newly84

February 28, 2011 at 5:32pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I think I'll start a collection of R's brilliant comments and repost them all at one time.

- Newly84

February 28, 2011 at 5:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You go right ahead. That's been tried before by people here a helluva lot smarter than you. The results were not promising for you. Crash and burn. Let's face it, newly. icarus is a very civil fellow. He has no reason to be otherwise being erudite, knowledgeable, and well read over a wide range of subjects. But your stupidity taxes even his patience. That, to the best of my knowledge, is a singular achievement here.

- roidubouloi

February 28, 2011 at 5:52pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Newly84, think about roi like the slime in the Ghostbuster's movie: it is a glutinous matter that reacts both to positive and negative emotions and has been generated by the immense amount of negativity reflected in human attitudes. It actually thrives on negativity and shrinks and retreats when positivity abounds. That is, the more you try to shame him, the more sticky and sprawling he will get. Try coddling him, throw him a compliment, and he will sidle up to you like a poodle. Confront him with his errors and silliness, and he starts swelling and growing and dominating the space of discussion to such an extent that all thoughtful posters abandon the thread. He is an expert at baiting and therefore you must know that when he says something outrageous that you just can't resist answering, this is his greatest triumph, his greatest achievement. Bear in mind that there is no bottom line for him. He will descend to whatever slimey sewage he can think up, to score a point. He often declares himself to be a semi politician and from time to time mentions a mentor who taught him how to lose friends and repel people. And then, poor roi whines piteously that he is the one much set upon, attacked, persecuted, by a jackal pack that haunts these threads just for this single purpose. I know it is hard to understand, newly, but I tell you nothing but the truth. It has played many times in these fora. It is quite a hopeless struggle. You will not beat him. This thread is gone the way most threads go when roi has alighted upon it. Spare yourself the futile effort. I tried it. The man is unbeatable. And conversing with him brings nothing, that is, unless you like to chew on sawdust without the relief of water in sight.

- noga1

February 28, 2011 at 5:52pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Ah well, pigs "of a feather" rolling in shit together. When one of these funfests starts, it is only a matter of moments before noga shows up for a good wallow. It is absolutely irresistible to her. Doesn't even matter whether the subject has previously engaged her, as this one has not, she having made no previous comment on this thread. When the shit starts, she is right there. Not even Jane Austen appeals to her as much as an opportunity for a masochistic outing.

- roidubouloi

February 28, 2011 at 5:59pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Oh, pardon. Noga did appear here once for a little cut and paste with her little electronic scissors and pot of glue. Her second favorite activity after masochistic wallowing and self-martyrdom. You have found the perfect companion, newly! The Gargoyle of The Spine herself. Hard to imagine two who so richly deserve each other now that her other little pets have grown tired of her. Only to be expected that she would be in search of a new familiar, and you, newly, you poor, wretched thing are it. Congratulations. This is sure to be the most exciting thing that has ever happened to you until, eventually, you realize that your masochistic tendencies cannot possibly approach her masochistic appetites.

- roidubouloi

February 28, 2011 at 6:07pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I appreciate your motivation, malahat. But I didn't take the warning to heart, then or now. I found it, under the circumstances, ridiculous. I never start these fights. I didn't then and I haven't now. But I never, ever shrink from them. If the house comes down as a result, I really don't give a damn. Given my druthers, I would rather participate in a civil discussion of almost anything than do this. And if you are honest, you will have observed that I participate in many -- until that is, one of the goons shows up to start in. But I will not tolerate thugs and goons because there is actually an issue more important than what does or does not get discussed here, the ability of right-wing thugs to hijack public discourse with their execrable behavior. It has to end if we are to rescue the world, and all the civility in the world is not going to bring that about anymore than talking nicely to terrorists will persuade them to desist. As there is only one thing to do with terrorists, there is only one effective thing to be done with these thugs, bloody them until the cannot take any more.

- roidubouloi

February 28, 2011 at 6:16pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I understand, and thank you. Best just to stand aside. It is inevitably a messy affair and no reason for decent people to get caught in the cross-fire.

- roidubouloi

February 28, 2011 at 6:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

More roidubouloi wisdom: "Ah well, pigs "of a feather" rolling in shit together" He is an expert on pigs too. The shit he smells is from his own mouth.

- Newly84

February 28, 2011 at 6:29pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It seems that newly's manly efforts to go toe to toe have already outrun his very meager ability to think up anything to say. Practically a record for brevity. Try this, newly: "I know you are but what am I? I am rubber, you are glue, whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you." That should be just about your intellectual speed -- second year nursery school, give or take a little. You are virtually there now, might as well go all the way.

- roidubouloi

February 28, 2011 at 6:36pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"It seems that newly's manly efforts to go toe to toe have already outrun his very meager ability to think up anything to say. Practically a record for brevity." It seems that roidubouloi thinks he is the smartest wiseass her because he says he is the smartest wiseass here. People who believe their own lies are insecure about their intelligence. This is why they have to focus on the mental capacities of the people they argue against. It's only by denigrating others that they consider themselves superior. The truth is otherwise. that roidubouloi isn’t just dumb, he is also ignorant about what he says. He was told that all neocons thought alike and he believed it without reading their writing. He was told that all neocons wanted to invade every country in the Muslim world in order to “bring democracy there” and he believed it. Now that he has been proven wrong he has decided to attack neocons as inconsistent rather than accept that it was he who had been fooled. Yes, roidubouloi, you are a fool everyone here knows that and all your insults do is confirm your idiocy.

- Newly84

February 28, 2011 at 6:57pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I don’t believe that the Egyptian power structure would abrogate the peace accords because they know they would lose the Sinai Peninsula again should they start another war and that it would almost impossible for them to get it back since no one would trust their ability to honor a new peace accord.

- Packard

February 28, 2011 at 7:02pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Nah, there are plenty of people here smarter than I am, newly. But there is barely anyone here stupider than you. I denigrate your intelligence because there is so little there to denigrate that it doesn't take a lot of effort. To denigrate someone with a bit of intellect would be hard. This is easy, and I'm just lazy. As with all your kind, your final resort is to invent some words to put in my mouth so that you can imagine yourself refuting them. My view of neocons, expressed repeatedly here, is that their claimed devotion to a worldwide democratic agenda has nothing to do with democracy and everything to do with trying to undermine perceived enemies. Hence, the happily tolerate despots when they perceive it is in the American (or Israeli) interest to do so. And, no, I don't think that everyone who can be classed as a neocon or anything else thinks exactly alike. You, however, are such a ninny that when someone speaks here of a left or right view, your asinine objection is that there is no such thing as a left or right view as there is no unanimity. You confuse the scum you have forgotten to rinse from your navel as intelligent argument as that is where your nose is buried. It isn't. Its just scum, your metier.

- roidubouloi

February 28, 2011 at 7:25pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

“Nah, there are plenty of people here smarter than I am, newly. But there is barely anyone here stupider than you.” It won’t work, roidubouloi. Denying what is evidently true about you is what you do best. It’s not true that you think there are smarter people than you here. It’s also not true that you think I am the stupidest since you have said the same thing to more than a dozen posters. Try a new angle of attack, you might even consider being truthful just once in your life, though truth is probably not in you.

- Newly84

February 28, 2011 at 7:55pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Hosni Mubarak was a key U.S. ally…By letting his regime fall, Barack Obama has threatened the survival of the Jewish state." I find this a very curious statement (from the Isserroff article Noga linked to). I realize that Isseroff is citing someone and goes on to criticize the sentiment, but the general point strikes me as utterly nonsensical. Obama was not in any position whatsoever to "let" Mubarak's regime fall or to guarantee its continuation, and I don't understand how anyone could seriously think so. Mubarak's regime was falling due to internal Egyptian dynamics that we played almost no role in. The only thing that could have prevented such a collapse was if the military officer corps had decided to throw its weight behind the regime and had intimidated or shot down the protestors. And even then . . . ?

- ironyroad

February 28, 2011 at 7:57pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"French Aid Bolsters Libyan Revolt" By STEVEN ERLANGER "PARIS — France is moving quickly to side with the forces trying to overthrow the Libyan leader, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, sending planes on Monday with aid and doctors to eastern Libya. The French prime minister, François Fillon, said that two French planes were flying on Monday to the eastern city of Benghazi, the revolt’s birthplace, with doctors, nurses, medicines and medical equipment. “It will be the beginning of a massive operation of humanitarian support for the populations of liberated territories,” Mr. Fillon said on RTL radio. The French government is studying “all solutions to ensure that Colonel Qaddafi understands that he should go, that he should leave power,” he said. The French foreign ministry spokesman, Bernard Valero, said that the planes represented only “the first stage in the mobilization of France.” He said the two planes carried not only doctors and nurses, but also five tons of medicines and medical equipment. He spoke the morning after the French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, addressed the nation, saying that France welcomed the change of governments in North Africa. “These Arab revolutions have opened a new era in our relations with these countries and we should not be afraid of this change” from those who share “the values we hold most dear of human rights and democracy,” Mr. Sarkozy said. “Europe is in the front line,” he said, and called for a European summit meeting to discuss how to help the new democracies and to find a joint position on immigration, to deal with those fleeing uncertainty and violence in north Africa. But Mr. Fillon, like Mr. Sarkozy, spoke cautiously about any military intervention in Libya, which Western diplomats said France has opposed inside NATO and at the United Nations. Mr. Fillon said the prospect of a no-flight zone over Libya needed a United Nations Security Council resolution, “which is far from being obtained today,” and would require the involvement of NATO. “No one today in Europe has the means to carry out this operation alone,” Mr Fillon said. “It would be necessary to involve NATO, and I think that has to be thought about. Should NATO get involved in a civil war to the south of the Mediterranean? It is a question that at least merits some reflection before being launched.” He questioned whether NATO should get involved in a civil war in a North African country, in part because of the bitter history of European colonialism there. But he said that a no-fly zone is an option under study. He said France and Europe could not ignore “important migratory movements” but that before worrying about immigration, “the first topic is how to help these revolutions,” Mr. Fillon said" http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/01/world/europe/01france.html?_r=1&hp=&pagewanted=print

- Packard

February 28, 2011 at 9:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Icarus, for example, is much smarter than I am, better read, better educated, more articulate, and I will wager that he is better looking too. He too thinks you are incoherent, newly,is exasperated by it, and, to my recollection, has not said that about anyone else. That puts you pretty much in a class by yourself. I defer to his wisdom. That is not to say that you do not have company at all. You belong to a group of belligerent thugs who do not have the tools to advance an argument or marshal evidence. You become frustrated that mere repetition of your claims, particularly the most foolish of them, will not be accepted based on mere repetition, and then you resort to personal attacks. Why? Because the argument has outrun your abilities and you cannot bear it. Of corse, you morons like to make that claim of me and I always challenge you to find the example of me resorting first to personal attacks. No one as done so yet and this thread is no exception. It isn't my opinion of your stupidity that matters, newly, but your own. If you didn't yourself think you are every bit as stupid as I say you are, you wouldn't so quickly resort to personal insults as you did just above. You are admitting by this that even you don't believe you can make your point by argument. I am merely calling attention to the obvious to rub your nose in it.

- roidubouloi

February 28, 2011 at 9:30pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Icarus, for example, is much smarter than I am, better read, better educated, more articulate, and I will wager that he is better looking too." roidubouloi would say anything to win an argument. His answer shows his desperation.

- Newly84

February 28, 2011 at 9:58pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Two of my excellent Oscar tweets from last night, if I say so myself: 1. Florence and the Machine????? Who is she? Where did she come from? I'm so stuck in the two thousand and sevens. 2. I see that Hillary Swank has really packed on the ounceage. You eat two banana Yoghurts over a 14 hour period and that'll happen to you too. I've got a million of them.

- basman

February 28, 2011 at 10:15pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You don't think I genuinely believe that icarus is smarter than I, better read, better educated, and more articulate? I can assure you that I do. One need only look at the evidence, of which there is plenty. That does not inspire desperation in me, but pleasure at having the opportunity to observe someone such as he in action and the hope to learn a thing or two.

- roidubouloi

February 28, 2011 at 10:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Does someone get my point?

- basman

February 28, 2011 at 10:41pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Sure. But sometimes you just have to pretend that you didn't.

- roidubouloi

February 28, 2011 at 10:43pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Which is for all en masse to abandon TNR and all start tweeting. Twitter as salvation: every tweet like the wafer and the wine.

- basman

February 28, 2011 at 10:44pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

And yet you are still here.

- roidubouloi

February 28, 2011 at 10:51pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Caaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan't looooooooooooooook awaaaaaaaaaaaaay!

- basman

February 28, 2011 at 10:58pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

“You don't think I genuinely believe that icarus is smarter than I, better read, better educated, and more articulate?” You are still trying to win an argument, roidubouloi . You are also driving better posters than you away from here.

- Newly84

February 28, 2011 at 11:20pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

...James Kirchick is right that there is a strong difference of opinion here, but wrong to assume that the neocons are right and the Israelis wrong: first because the Egyptian upheavals are not over yet and second because democracy isn’t just a matter of overturning a tyrannical regime. There's many a slip 'twixt the cup and the lip.... I'm reading Kirchik's short piece diferently than you. Where does Kirchik assume the neocons are right? I read him as more sympathetic with Israeli wariness, thought that point--who is right and who is wrong as between some neoconservatives and the Israelis Kirchik averts to--is not his core argument.

- basman

February 28, 2011 at 11:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

roidubouloi is one of those people who gets up at 3am to get the last word in.

- Newly84

February 28, 2011 at 11:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

avert to should be advert to. mind melting from too much time on twitter.

- basman

February 28, 2011 at 11:39pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"James Kirchick is right that there is a strong difference of opinion here, but wrong to a ssume that the neocons are right and the Israelis wrong: first because the Egyptian upheavals are not over yet and second because democracy isn’t just a matter of overturning a tyrannical regime. There's many a slip 'twixt the cup and the lip...." basman This is obvious to anyone except Roid.

- Newly84

February 28, 2011 at 11:40pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Sorry your post (f 02/28/2011 - 11:40pm EDT | Newly84) makes no sense to me and has nothing to do with roidubouloi. The words you put quotation marks around with my name following them are yours, which I quoted you to say, to set up a question to you. The queston is, just to repeat myself is--and these are now my words-- 'Where does Kirchik assume the neocons are right? I read him as more sympathetic with Israeli wariness, thought that point--who is right and who is wrong as between some neoconservatives and the Israelis Kirchik averts to--is not his core argument." Do you care to answer my question? Where am I misreading Kirchik, if I am?

- basman

February 28, 2011 at 11:57pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

again adverts to, adverts to, adverts to. Damn you twitter!

- basman

March 1, 2011 at 12:06am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

How do you reead the last paragraph, Mr. Basman? "“It’s important not to be an Orientalist, to think that we can change the culture of the Middle East,” notes Yaakov Amidror, program director of the Institute for Contemporary Affairs at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs and a former commander of the Israeli Defense Force’s National Defense College. “This turns out to be presumptuous and unrealistic.” A prominent Israeli hawk invoking Edward Said to denounce the core idea behind neoconservative foreign policy: Could there be a starker illustration of just how mistaken the neocon-Israeli conflation always was?"

- Newly84

March 1, 2011 at 12:09am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Newly84: First let me repeat the whole of the last paragraph in which what you quote of Kirchik's is embedded. “Democracy in the Middle East, Ganor and others say, must be about a liberal culture that respects the rights of women and minorities—and acknowledges the presence of a Jewish State. But they are skeptical this is possible anytime soon, in Egypt or elsewhere. “It’s important not to be an Orientalist, to think that we can change the culture of the Middle East,” notes Yaakov Amidror, program director of the Institute for Contemporary Affairs at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs and a former commander of the Israeli Defense Force’s National Defense College. “This turns out to be presumptuous and unrealistic.” A prominent Israeli hawk invoking Edward Said to denounce the core idea behind neoconservative foreign policy: Could there be a starker illustration of just how mistaken the neocon-Israeli conflation always was?” So, in it, Kirchik paraphrases “Ganor and others” for their view that democracy needs the hallmark institutions of liberal democracy—liberal culture, respect for minority rights—to name two and adds to that short list, recognition of a Jewish state. Kirchik notes that “Gaynor and others” are doubtful that liberal democratic hallmarks will occur any time soon. This all has “Ganor and others” following a line of analysis that is in stark contrast with the neo conservative giddiness he previously rehearses in his piece. Kirchik then notes that another Israeli, Yaakov Amidor, again in contrast with neoconservative giddiness, thinks that it is “presumptuous and unrealistic” to conclude that “we can change the culture of the Middle East”, which thought , ie at it can be done, Amidor equates with being a Saidian “orientalist.” Kirchik notes the paradox of a prominent Israeli hawk citing Said to denounce what Kirchik identifies as a core neoconservative foreign policy premise—the possibility of quick-to-come democracy in the Middle East, which can leap o’er the slow build up of necessary liberal democratic hallmarks. This all then leads Kirchik to his main point—the egregiously mistaken conflation in the idea of neoconservatives and Israeli political and military elites as assimilable to each other. So having explicated Kirchik’s last paragraph I’m even more convinced that you can make no case for the thesis that Kirchik in this piece thinks the neoconservatives were right. Where is your textual evidence for that view, where, where, oh where?

- basman

March 1, 2011 at 12:57am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Newly: I did not get the impression that Kirchick's thrust in this post is based on an agreement with the neo-cons' position. To me it seems that he is inclined to regard Israel's anxieties as well merited. _____ "What’s more, Israeli skeptics note, the new Egyptian dispensation need not be dominated by the Brotherhood to pose problems for Israel. According to the Israeli analyst Barry Rubin, “Islamism is not the only alternative ideology. There’s an alternative ideology called radical Arab nationalism.” Egyptian nationalists, he says, could make life more difficult for Israel by assisting Hamas in Gaza and, generally, taking a staunchly anti-Western stance." I am a regular visitor to the Angry Arab blog who I think is more in tune with the passions of the Arab street than Gerecht or those who think like him. Here he is, mocking the media for assuming that pan-Arabism is not a major player: http://angryarab.blogspot.com/2011/02/rejuvenation-of-arab-nationalism-andor.html "I have argued in public speeches (although I have not published it yet) about "the rejuvenation of Arab nationalism" in the wake of the war on Iraq back in 1991. I still stand by my thesis and now find ample evidence of it. This is an unreported story of the developments in the Arab world: how the events in Tunisia have affected every Arab country in one way or another, and only Arab countries. How the slogans are being changed from maghrib to mashriq without an organizational orchestration. Tunisia is leading the way: it is setting the tone and pace of the uprisings. I am watching live footage of demonstrations in Tunisia today: and the slogans could not be clearer: a voice of Arab nationalist solidarity. There are flags of most Arab countries in the protests in Tunisia today, and as soon as Bin Ali fled, Tunisians were chanting about the "liberation of Palestine." Egyptian protesters have been more cautious in their collective action because: 1) Egyptian nationalism is strong and have been nurtured for decades by Sadat and Mubarak AND Camp David; 2) Egyptian protesters are keen on not antagonizing the military at this point for many reasons, and the Arab nationalist manifestation would translate into undermining that precious--by US/Israeli standards--treaty. But these are revolutionary time: Alexander Kerensky is barely remembered in the Russian Revolution. Ahmad Shafiq will be a footnote to the story. The Tunisian protesters will also lead the way in how they keep pushing: after they achieve victories, they push even more. Now they want to bring down the cabinet and to create a constitutional convention. Finally: what is Aljazeera if not an Arab nationalist phenomenon? Also, note that Islamist from Tunisia to Morocco and to Egypt are now increasingly speaking about the "Arab ummah"."

- noga1

March 1, 2011 at 7:13am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

No, newly, if anyone is driving posters away, it is you. Because I don't start these fights, you do. I finish them. You just refuse to accept the responsibility for your behavior and throw up a lot of dust to distract people from what you are doing. Behave yourself, and everyone will be happy. You will be quite free to express whatever opinions you like, certainly without being messed around by me.

- roidubouloi

March 1, 2011 at 7:27am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I think Kerchick's purpose, for political reasons, is just as advertised, to "prove" that the neo-cons and the Likud are not really two sides of the same coin. But they are. This disagreement amongst a few of them is over tone and attitude, not over policy, and doesn't even rise to the level of a lovers' spat. The neo-cons have been carrying water for the Likud for a long time and the lot of them are a plague, both here and in Israel. Find a failed foreign policy or one doomed to failure and there is a good chance that you will find one or both. To avoid this, the latest tactic of neocons is to declare that events that have occurred already were always their policy. That's one way to minimize failure. The Israeli branch of the party does not enjoy the same luxury. Still no big deal.

- roidubouloi

March 1, 2011 at 7:32am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"No, newly, if anyone is driving posters away, it is you" Another self-serving hallucination from roi. Pitifully necessary, I guess, for his precariously fragile self-esteem.

- noga1

March 1, 2011 at 7:47am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It is hilarious watching you, noga, completely unable to restrain your ghoulish self from getting into any muck you can find. I'm going to give you a hint to see if you can improve your game. The art of this sort of thing, noga, is figuring out the psychological vulnerabilities of the person on the other side (although person should be understood as only a rhetorical placeholder in your case). That is decidedly non-trivial in a medium such as this. It requires a certain alertness and acuteness of mind that, so far, you have never displayed. It does not seem that reading and re-reading Jane Austen has given you much insight into human beings at all. Perhaps that is because you do not think, you only cut and paste. Part of what I find so amusing about you is that, most always, you can be found punching at the air, throwing wild haymakers at me (or whatever you happen to be talking about) completely unable to discern where the target it is. It is as if you are wearing a blindfold in a boxing ring. Even when, by accident, you happen to whistle a punch past my head, you have no awareness that you have done so. You just keep failing around. And then it is pitifully easy to distract you and direct your attention elsewhere, away from the target you have just missed. This tiny excrescence from your bottomless pit of bile is but the latest in a very long line. It is funny, because it comes nowhere me and just confirms, yet again, how inept you are. Next time, maybe I will explain to you how one listens for what a speaker does not intend to reveal. Or maybe I won't.

- roidubouloi

March 1, 2011 at 8:40am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"The art of this sort of thing, noga, is figuring out the psychological vulnerabilities of the person on the other side" Indeed. And what better proof of a fragile, and rapidly disintegrating, self-image than an incontinent 420+ word response to a 14-word long comment?

- noga1

March 1, 2011 at 8:51am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

ironyroad: about your earlier comment in defence of Obama's policies. I agree with the point you were making. However, here is a new article from Isseroff in which he decsribes the great fallacy on which perceptions and policies towards the M-E were based. http://www.zionism-israel.com/israel_news/2011/03/01/understanding-the-arab-revolts-where-is-the-middle-east/#more-1059 No mention of Obama in this article but I doubt you can argue that Obama's policies towards Israel (settlements, linkage with Iran's nukes) were not informed by this fallacy: "Already, Palestinians are threatening a Palestinian and Arab rising against Israel. They are trying to coopt the Arab revolts: "Part of the rage displayed by the people in these uprisings is at the Israeli aggression and the crimes committed against their Palestinian brothers as one of the major and obvious demands of the Egyptian January 25th revolution is to stop exporting the Egyptian crude natural gas to Israel in a clear message that urges the Egyptian government to stop supporting and collaborating with the occupying and aggressive Zionist regime." Really, is that why Egyptians are angry with Hosni Mubarak? Is that why Libyans were angry at Muammar Ghaddafi? Because he is soft on Israel? Could anyone imagine that people risked death in Benghazi because of the supposed apathy of Muammar Ghaddafi to the Palestinian cause? It doesn’t matter that none of this rhetoric corresponds in any way to reality. The media and the ideologues will insist, and the academics will be bribed to invent a convincing rationale. In the meantime, for a few short weeks, the Arab revolts are evidence, for those who care to know, that there is more to the Middle East than the Israeli-Palestinian conflict."

- noga1

March 1, 2011 at 9:00am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This is so typical of your blindness, noga, that you think word counts are indicative of anything other than the count of words. You exceed my expectations. I was absolutely confident that no amount of coaching would render you any less ineffectual. And it didn't take more than a few moments for the proof to arrive! (56 words here, just to help out) ______________________ "In the meantime, for a few short weeks, the Arab revolts are evidence, for those who care to know, that there is more to the Middle East than the Israeli-Palestinian conflict." Such insight! Keep that little pair of electronic scissors and pot of glue humming. A fabulous service to the TNR readership. I have no doubt that if you can make a sufficiently high pile of stupid things said by other people, sooner or later this will amount to proof by induction that there really IS a thought in your own head. Every stupid utterance will be here and thus, by process of elimination, we will know that there are none left for you. Then, if you can but prove that there is something in there, Q.E.D.

- roidubouloi

March 1, 2011 at 9:09am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Here is a hopeful voice for the re-emergence of pan-Arab nationalism from another Arab blogger whose blog I visit: http://www.intifada-palestine.com/2011/02/arab-uprisings-time-out-for-israel-is-over/ "The Arabic street is the one who is calling the shots now, the coming Arab policies will try and reflect the pulse of the Arabic street. The united Arab sounds are to be heard at last where no American veto could come out to obliterate the truth and where no need to waste more than one million innocent Arabs to allegedly get rid of a dictator. It is time for the Palestinian intifada to spread beyond the borders of Palestine. It is time for Arab solidarity to come into action and effect and for pan-Arabism to be revived again; it is time for the Arab-Israeli conflict to be conducted by regimes that won’t sell out the Palestinian cause in secret." From what I read in the English written Arab press and blogosphere, there is a democratic struggle between the secularists and the fundamentalists over the Arab soul. Neither is greatly concerned with the delights and rewards of democratization. But both are aiming for the greatest prize: the annihilation of Israel. And there are people who have the gall to blame Israel for being profoundly leery of "democracy" in the Arab world.

- noga1

March 1, 2011 at 9:09am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Note to Newly: roi's latest to me is an illustration of his superior capabilities for baiting which I tried to explain to you @ 02/28/2011 - 5:52pm EDT. What he doesn't get yet is that such tactics lose their effectiveness once you have done one bait too many. Poor roi, stuck inside his mobile, incapable of breaking free from the teachings of his cherished mentor.

- noga1

March 1, 2011 at 9:17am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Israelis who are dedicated to endless occupation and domination of the Palestinians constantly nurture the hope that the Palestinians can be wrested from the larger Arab polity so that they can confront them alone. To this end, they are always telling us about the cynical exploitation of the Palestinians by other Arabs, about how nothing that happens to or in or regarding Palestine has anything to do with anything else, etc., etc. Then, on the other hand, they wring their hands over the reality that, just as diaspora Jews maintain solidarity with Israel despite all sorts of periodic rifts, feuds, disagreements, the Arab polity maintains solidarity with the Palestinians. By virtue of its agreement with Egypt, Israel persuaded itself that it was a dominant power and has acted accordingly, wasting time and opportunity in pursuit of land instead of peace. The basic reality remains unchanged, however. Israel is that it is at war not with the Palestinians but with the entire Arab world and has always been at war with the entire Arab world however the borders within it are drawn. Thus, Israel can never win, it can only lose. The enemy is too large. The safest place for Israel is formally at peace and firmly lodged within the western community. But Israel won't go there. It prefers to rely on the delusions of its "might" (Netanyahu's favorite word) because it cannot overcome its lust for land. This is why I describe neocons and the Likud as a plague. They have the same delusions of power where it does not exist.

- roidubouloi

March 1, 2011 at 9:22am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You don't imagine I an bait you successfully, noga? Read above. I have merely to whisper.

- roidubouloi

March 1, 2011 at 9:28am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Read above. I have merely to whisper." As in a 420 word response to a mere 14-word comment ...

- noga1

March 1, 2011 at 9:36am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Israelis who are dedicated to endless occupation and domination of the Palestinians constantly nurture the hope that the Palestinians can be wrested from the larger Arab polity so that they can confront them alone." Not really, no. It's Palestinians who like to pretend to the more clueless in this world that they are a nation separate while in fact their very own charter re-affirms with great emphasis their being part of the Arab Ummah. It is easier to appear oppressed in the eyes of the West when they pretend that they are not a part of a 400 million strong Arab nation itself enjoying the knee jerk support of 1.1 billion Muslims. It also explains why Palestinians reject all peace proposals submitted to them and fail to show up for negotiations even when settlement activities are suspended.

- noga1

March 1, 2011 at 9:50am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Baiting you is trivial, mocking you can take a little longer, and it is worth taking longer because one can savor the experience. I suppose you prefer the Cliff notes version to Jane Austen, no? Fewer words. ______________________ "Not really, no. It's Palestinians who like to pretend to the more clueless in this world that they are a nation separate while in fact their very own charter re-affirms with great emphasis their being part of the Arab Ummah." Shocking, that people will claim to be one thing and then another for greatest political advantage. Who would have thought that would be possible? The reality of power is that they are part of the Arab world, no less than Texas, to my deep regret, is part of the United States (can I not find anyone other than Gov. Perry in favor of the Republic of Texas?). It is the reality of power that makes itself felt in the world, albeit sometimes slowly, not the names or guises that it adopts from one moment to the next, and certainly not the delusions. The Palestinians won't show up to be offered the same cold porridge they have rejected several times already, the same lousy deal that Israelis keep telling themselves is "obvious" so that they can keep their hands firmly over their eyes? Why should the Palestinians show up for that? Time is on their side, only the Likud is too stupid and too overcome with its lusts (and freighted with Messianic nuts) to understand. When history is written, the untimely loss of Sharon will turn out to be one of the greatest tragedies for Israel. However, the situation is not hopeless. If you can cut and paste enough material at a sufficiently high rate demonstrating that enough different people are anti-Semites, disaster can be averted. I know you are on the case. Keep up your fine work. The future of Israel hangs in the balance.

- roidubouloi

March 1, 2011 at 10:33am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

And they're off.

- basman

March 1, 2011 at 10:51am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Baiting you is trivial, mocking you can take a little longer, and it is worth taking longer because one can savor the experience." Nothing is trivial for you roi. You devote equal time to baiting, mocking and responding in some substance. To me this suggests you are incapable of prioritizing, or rather, classifying. You are also unteachable. These are two symptoms for a mental disability.

- noga1

March 1, 2011 at 10:56am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

yeah, yeah :-)

- roidubouloi

March 1, 2011 at 11:51am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Say, noga, when you have something you want to teach me, please flag it. I want to savor that too. I don't want to miss it because it is lost in a welter of . . . well, you know.

- roidubouloi

March 1, 2011 at 11:53am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yawn.

- noga1

March 1, 2011 at 12:12pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Safely back under her rock. All in a day's work.

- roidubouloi

March 1, 2011 at 1:17pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Bigger yawn.

- noga1

March 1, 2011 at 1:44pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Basman, if he's sympathetic of Israel's wariness, then he surely thinks that their fears are not baseless (as opposed to Basmanless)? I found his article extremely sympathetic to Israel. And for once, I agree with Kirchik.

- MOLLYSIMON

March 1, 2011 at 2:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

When I occasionally lose a few pounds, I am basmanless. I thought his a pretty good, concise piece.

- basman

March 1, 2011 at 3:30pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close