Saturday, November 11, 2006

Uh, no...

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Perhaps I can explain it...":

When the U.S. acts only in its narrowly perceived best interests, it is not acting in it's (sic) broad best interests.

Would that lead you to agree, ala Mearsheimer and Walt, that nearly unconditional US support for Israel, which seems is pretty 'narrow' in the sense that it is largely the product of the influence of Jewish lobbyists, is not really in the wider interest of the US, since it alienates a far larger number of muslims worldwide, including ones who control a huge fraction of the world's oil?

Ben's response.

Dear A,

Sorry about "it's" instead of "its"

I believe "narrow" takes " " not ' ' .

I think "muslims" should be "Muslims."

Re: Your substantive quention.
Most Jews, most Americans and particularly American fundamentalists support Israel.

Yes, Jews have tough-minded pro-Israel lobbyists.

I wonder: Are they are tougher than the AARP, the AMA, Pharma or Johnson & Johnson.

One great advantage that Jews have: Jews not only vote at higher rates than most American, but they tend to come from "swing states" in a "winner-take-all" "first-past-the-post" system.

For a long time a key question was "What is more important Arab oil or Jewish potency in the Electoral College?

The answer may well have been the latter.

Ironically, because Jews tend to vote on the liberal side, and too many liberals oppose nuclear power, American Jews are helping Arabs.

Go figure.


PS: I hopv I havnt md noh tipgrpahical or gremeticl errahs.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Gee, what a surprise: You're a Jew and you don't think the 'narrow' unconditional US support of Israel is not in the best interest of the country, even though it is the prime reason for the poor image of the US in the muslim world, and one of the prime motivators of terrorism.

And here is the latest reason why so many muslims hate the US: US vetoes motion on Gaza attack.

Let's ask a couple of questions here: What did the Israeli military think was going to happen when they fired tank/artillery shells into a crowded urban area? Do they think such shelling is some sort of modern, precision weapon? Or do they have a nearly complete disregard for Palestinian civilian life? Preferring to shoot first and issue perfunctory apologies later? -- i.e. after the civilians, almost always including women and children, are dead.

It is so obvious that such support of Israel is not in the best interest of the US that suggesting otherwise shows the depth of your dishonest and irrational bias.

November 11, 2006  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home