Joe Klein talks to Jeffrey Goldberg about neocons, Israel, Iran, etc. Klein makes a lot of sense.
« The McCain Magic | Main | There's The Love »
Dialogue
30 Jul 2008 08:26 am
Comments (13)
SLC, quote what you call "appeasement" in the exchange.
Re Jeffrey Davis
Appeasement is the implication from Mr. Klein that production of nuclear weapons by Iran is a benign development. It is nothing of the kind; it is a threat to the entire region and a club that Iran can hold over the other oil producing nations therein to force them to adhere to the Iranian agenda.
Klein doesn't call it a benign development; he calls it an understandable action they can take.
This is a key point that a lot of conservatives, contemporary conservatives in particular, don't get: an action can be BOTH dangerous AND rational on the part of the nation carrying it out.
BTW, "the only thing those people understand is force" is what people say just before a massacre.
SLC, "implication" doesn't cut it.
Nobody stopped Israel from developing nukes. Goose. Gander. Etc.
Klein's point isn't about "divided loyalty," it's about "unified loyalty."
It isn't a question of people who put Israel's interest before that of the United States, but of people who don't realize that the two are different things to begin with.
There are quite a few people, many of whom work at National Review and believe that the Lord of the Rings is a guidebook for foreign policy, who genuinely believe that advancing Israel's interests is, by definition, the same thing as advancing America's interest.
Appeasement: to buy off (an aggressor) by concessions usually at the sacrifice of principles (Merriam-Webster)
Please note the complete absence of any reference to "thinking something is benign." By definition, appeasement is something you do when dealing with someone who is not benign.
I didn't see Klein propose to buy anyone off.
I didn't see Klein propose anything that violated any principles.
You're just using a buzzword, SLC, and improperly at that.
SLC said:
"It is a threat to the entire region."
Why again is Iran having nuclear weapons a threat to the entire region while Israel possessing the same is perfectly OK? The hypocrisy is laughable and utterly indefensible.
Please enlighten me to a single instance in which Iran has violated the soverignty of another nation via a military strike?
The way you ignorantly use buzzwords such as "appeasement" gives morons a bad name.
Who cares what Ahmedinejad understands? What's important is what the JURISTS understand.
They seem to understand American bellicosity pretty well; they initiated a nuclear program because of it.
We've been trying your way for 8 years, and your way has failed. Giving them 140,000 sitting ducks to hold hostage allows them to call Bush's bluff on air strikes.
While Klein is making a lot of sense these days, this is just super aggravating:
JG: You seem very angry at people who you specifically identify as Jewish neocons. And you're using the word "Jewish" in ways that we haven't seen Jewish reporters and Jewish columnists use.
JK: It's about time. I think everyone else is too afraid to do it. Let me just make something very clear that you already know about me. I am a strong supporter of Israel... I am not a Walt-Mearsheimer guy. I think Jews have a perfect right to have a lobby. I do believe that there is a group of people who got involved and had a disproportionate influence on U.S. foreign policy. There were people out there in the Jewish community who saw this as a way to create a benign domino theory and eliminate all of Israel's enemies.
Except that is exactly what Walt and Mearsheimer were saying! Their central thesis was that there is a lobby, it has disproportionate influence on American policy and that influence is not in America's best foreign policy interests - exactly what Klein is articulating. It's one thing to set up a strawman as a way of separating yourself from the radical fringe and establishing your bonafides for criticizing Israel. It's entirely another to establish a strawman that's 180 degrees (well, maybe 170) from reality. His readers deserve better.
Once again for the retarded (that includes you, SLC):
Iran has no nuclear weapons program.
Iran never did have a nuclear weapons program.
Iran probably will never have a nuclear weapons program - at least as long as Khamenei is in charge or doesn't have a change of heart as a result of a unilateral US attack using nuclear bunker busters.
None of this war stuff has anything to do with a nonexistent Iranian nuclear weapons program. Just as with Iraq, it has to do with oil, war profiteering, ME hegemony (which means oil), and Israel. Nothing more.
It really is time to take Israel down. That country is THE biggest problem for the entire world in a way that Iran or the Taliban in Afghanistan couldn't even begin to aspire to. Israel is THE biggest sponsor of terrorism, THE biggest illegal weapons dealer - including nuclear materials, one of the biggest drug organized crime cartels in the world, and THE biggest aggressor in the Middle East, as well as the worst rogue state in the Middle East, by far. It's criminal gangs and spies operate everywhere in the world, including Australia (where they got kicked out), the US, Europe, and Asia. They even want to make a deal with North Korea to sell them the "Wall" technology so North Korea can fence in the North Koreans trying to escape to China.
Israel has to go.
RSH --
glad you think so. So why are the Euros discussing "iran's nuke weapons program" with the iranians?
And please -- your name is clearly Osama bin abdullah Osama Hussein bin Mohammed. I don't believe for a second you have an anglo name.
I think Klein defends himself very well--being correct certainly helps in that regard.
A nuclear Iran is a much bigger problem than a nuclear Israel for reasons that should be obvious to objective observers. But it is almost certainly inevitable, and preventing this understandable eventuality by starting a war with Iran would be near-psychotic in its counterproductivity.
Comments closed August 13, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
Re Joe Klein
Typical Chamberlainist thinking by Mr. Klein. These folks never learn that appeasement doesn't work. The only thing that the Amadinejads of the world understand is the mailed fist. Trying to be nice to them is a stick in the wind. Hold the specter of a rain of 15 megaton bombs over the mullahs in Iran and their behavior may moderate.
Posted by SLC | July 30, 2008 8:58 AM