Posted on 05/26/2011 7:14:22 AM PDT by Qbert
A freshman House Republican on Wednesday singled out "most" liberal American Jews for not being sufficiently pro-Israel.
Rep. Joe Walsh (Ill.) questioned why U.S. Jews have not expressed more outrage over President Obama's demand that the Israeli-Palestinian peace process be based around the 1967 borders, with mutually agreeable land swaps.
"The short answer is that most American Jews are liberal, and most American liberals side with the Palestinians and vague notions of 'peace' instead of with Israel’s well-being and security," Walsh wrote in an op-ed for the conservative Daily Caller.
Walsh, who is Catholic, added that the American Jewish community should be more pro-Israel.
"Like the president, the U.N., and most of Europe, too many American Jews aren’t as pro-Israel as they should be and too many share his belief that the Palestinians are victims of Israeli occupation," he wrote. "Nothing could be further from the truth."
While members of Congress on both sides of the aisle have broken with Obama over his statements about the Israeli-Palestinian border, few if any have publicly questioned the response from the Jewish community.
Several major Jewish groups have defended the president's position. The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) said that Obama understands the "nuances" involved in the conflict.
"This administration has come a long way in two years in terms of understanding of the nuances involved in bringing about Israeli-Palestinian peace and a better understanding of the realities and challenges confronting Israel," the group said in a statement last week following Obama's White House speech on the Middle East, in which he layed out his vision for Israeli-Palestinian peace.
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) released a statement after Obama's speech at its annual conference, noting that the president's position is not that Israel should withdraw to the 1967 border — a border Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called "indefensible."
But Walsh accused the president of sympathizing with the Palestinians and putting their interests ahead of Israel's, citing Obama's 2007 remark that "nobody is suffering more than the Palestinian people."
"Most U.S. presidents have followed the old paradigm and tried to be an honest broker between the two sides," he wrote. "President Obama seems only to pay lip service to even that role, and clearly his sympathies lie with the Palestinians. He is not capable of achieving peace in the Middle East because he is not pro-Israel."
"Second, a United Nations vote on Palestinian statehood would give Israel an opportunity to rectify the mistake we made in 1967 by failing to annex all of the West Bank (as we did the eastern half of Jerusalem). We could then extend full Israeli jurisdiction to the Jewish communities and uninhabited lands of the West Bank.....These Palestinians would not have the option to become Israeli citizens, therefore averting the threat to the Jewish and democratic status of Israel by a growing Palestinian population."
You're right that Begin gave back the Sinai but that was because the Likud, aside from a few extremists, never regarded that land as part of Greater Israel. Begin if you remember never tired of waxing eloquent about Judea and Samaria NOT the Sinai.
Thanks justiceseeker93. Rep. Joe Walsh, barnstorming again.
I get the feeeling that you would call anything short of 1967 borders "bantustans"
Bless you!!!
The funny thing is, Captain Kirk was played by William Shatner, a Jew, IIRC.
When I was a kid, I loved that show so much I actually thought Shatner was a good actor! :)
Many leftists try to couch their hatred of Jews behind “anti-Zionist” assertions.
Replacement theology is on this continuum.
I could use some blessings! Thanks.
I finally caught on when he was attacking Gene Simmons (Kiss, Jewish) and some other random things.
There was no logical connection (intervene HERE, but not HERE), then I realized, “oh, everything and everyone he complains about is Jewish or Israeli.”
Nothing could be further from the truth. If we took Israel and the Arabs both off American welfare both sides might actually make some interesting and creative land swaps.
One possibility is that Israel could trade away some of the Arab majority areas in Israel proper (along the 1967 border) to the new Palestine state in exchange for the Palestinians renouncing their rights to East Jerusalem and Jewish settlements along the other side of the 1967 border.
Such creative thinking now is impossible. Meanwhile, the Israelis in the long-face a demographic time bomb in the territories and Israel proper because of high Arab birthrates. Ten years from now it may be too late to cut such a deal.
BTW, what is your long-term alternative? Ethnic cleansing of the Arabs from the territories? Be honest now.
Nothing could be further from the truth. If we took Israel and the Arabs both off American welfare both sides might actually make some interesting and creative land swaps.
One possibility is that Israel could trade away some of the Arab majority areas in Israel proper (along the 1967 border) to the new Palestine state in exchange for the Palestinians renouncing their rights to East Jerusalem and Jewish settlements along the other side of the 1967 border.
Such creative thinking now is impossible. Meanwhile, the Israelis face a long-face a demographic time bomb in the territories and Israel proper because of high Arab birthrates. Ten years from now it may be too late to cut such a deal.
BTW, what is your long-term alternative? Ethnic cleansing of the Arabs from the territories? Be honest now.
I don’t believe American Jews have a particular obligation to be pro-Israel; we are Americans first and “Old Country” (if we can identify the places our ancestors came from) second. However, ALL good Americans should however be pro-Israel because Israel is a fellow civilized democracy whose enemies (theocracies, despots, and so on) are also the traditional and historic enemies of the United States.
As an American Jew, it continually amazes me that people believe we should have one voice. I happen to have an Orthodox education, but I was raised to be an American first. In my opinion that means if Israel was my number one priority at the election polls, then I would move to Israel. That does not mean that I don’t support Israel. Many Jews do vote liberal, in many cases that is not a vote for Palestine, but a vote for anti-conservative policies in the United States. That argument is a whole other ballgame. In truth, it is my most liberal family members that have purchased Israeli bonds for me at special occasions and planted a tree in Israel for every person attending their special occasion. Of course their are also Jews who agreed with Obama’s speech and while I personally think they are wrong, I don’t think it has much to do with the fact that they are Jewish.
“As an American Jew, it continually amazes me that people believe we should have one voice. I happen to have an Orthodox education, but I was raised to be an American first.”
I think a big part of the “one voice” notion harkens back to the creation of Israel. As historians have noted, President Truman was in a weaker position politically after the war, and was facing a tough upcoming election in 1948. He felt that he needed the Jewish vote to win, and thus he supported the recognition of the new Israel, despite fierce antagonism towards the idea from members of his own State Department.
Where I think the notion of a unified Jewish voice comes into play is in the fact that not only did Truman win, but he helped solidify the Democrat-Jewish vote (which was arguably uncertain after FDR’s own questionable statements and actions during his time) by strongly supporting the recognition of Israel. His own Defense Secretary in fact, claimed that the US was supposedly jeopardizing its national security solely to appeal to the American “Jewish lobby”. Yet, unlike today, where a divide in American Jews concerning support for Israel exists- vocal opposition to support for Israel in the crucial mid-late 1940’s and the immediate years after was almost non-existent. In the eyes of older non-Jewish Americans, these factors likely colored the view that there was solid, unified support for the country within the American Jewish community (based on religious faith).
“Make” them take it? What if they say no? They have every reason not to because the Palestinians would immediatly launch an insurgency. The folks in much smaller Monaco, Andorra, or other places aren’t too small to exist.
Thank you for the insight.
Again, how do you “make” them annex the Arab areas since they have no motivation to do so and every motivation not to do so? Again, if that is a plan, you must have an answer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.