Lion of the Blogosphere

Obama’s parting f*** you to Trump and Netanyahu

It took me a while to realize the seriousness of what Obama did, which creates huge problems for Trump and Israel.

Now I have to admit that a lot of foreign policy customs make no sense. Like Trump’s phone call with the president of Taiwan. Who knew that the president of the United States wasn’t allowed to talk to the president of a country with which we have friendly relations and to which we sell billions of dollars of military equipment? But despite all the blathering in the mainstream media about that phone call, we don’t have any treaty with China that forbids the POTUS from talking to whomever he wants, and even if we did, Trump is still a private citizen and not yet the President.

Some people think that the U.N. is powerless, but that’s not quite correct. The General Assembly is pretty much powerless, which is the way that it was set up by the five biggest powers at the end of World War II. The Security Council does have the power to create international law, which the United States respects, and that has never been a problem for the United States. The reason it has not been a problem is because the Security Council has never created any law that goes against American interests; we just veto anti-American resolutions, or anything else we disagree with. And for that matter, the Security Council has also never created any law that goes against the interests of Russia, China, the United Kingdom, or France.

Within this framework, the United States, for decades, has been vetoing all anti-Israel resolutions. This is a policy the incoming president Donald Trump has made clear he would continue. And it’s also a policy that Congress would agree with if put to a vote, and not just because Republicans would support it, but because a large number of Democrats would also support it.

This resolution gives Trump a huge diplomatic problem. Theoretically, Israel’s settlements now violate international law, and there isn’t any way to reverse that law because there isn’t a majority vote on the Security Council to repeal the resolution (which passed 14-0). The Israel-hating nations of the world will take advantage of this resolution to make Israel much more of a pariah nation than she already is. Trump has signaled that we aren’t going to support the resolution, but reversing seventy years of the United States respecting the resolutions passed by the Security Council is a massively big deal.

So you see, on a scale of 1 to 10 with respect to upsetting traditional U.S. foreign policy, Trump talking to the president of Taiwan is a 2 (China blew off a little steam about it but now it’s over and done with) and Obama failing to veto the anti-Israel resolution is at least an 8 if not a 9 (with a 10 being actually getting us into a war with someone).

Obama is the most evil president in U.S. history, and like Rubio said, he always knew exactly what he was doing.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

December 24, 2016 at 4:51 pm

Posted in International, Politics

79 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Trump has signaled that we aren’t going to support the resolution, but reversing seventy years of the United States respecting the resolutions passed by the Security Council is a massively big deal.

    The resolution itself can just be ignored by both the United States and Israel – what can the UN do to enforce it? Send in armored divisions?

    The Arabs have no right to complain about someone violating their “human rights” anyway.

    The Undiscovered Jew

    December 24, 2016 at 5:02 pm

  2. “Obama is the most evil president in U.S. history, and like Rubio said, he always knew exactly what he was doing.”

    I disagree. I think Obama is an ineffectual boob who has basically no idea what he is doing, but who is nevertheless a true believer of a lot of lefty shibboleths like “Israeli settlements in Palestinian territory are bad”.

    Two in the Bush

    December 24, 2016 at 5:07 pm

    • I don’t think he is particularly smart. He admitted that he couldn’t do math past the 8th grade.

      Rosenmops

      December 24, 2016 at 11:03 pm

  3. This won’t lead to Israel being boycotted and sanctioned by the EU next week. What it does do is make it the Israeli-Palestinian conflict far harder if not impossible for the Trump administration to just IGNORE. Perhaps that was the real intention here.

    As an Israeli, what I’d like to see is the Trump administration pulling the Russians towards a more pro-Israel position in exchange for concessions elsewhere. A USA+Russia coalition could force favorable terms on the Palestinians and their fans in the EU.

    IHTG

    December 24, 2016 at 5:08 pm

    • “As an Israeli, what I’d like to see is the Trump administration pulling the Russians towards a more pro-Israel position in exchange for concessions elsewhere.”

      The US should do what it can to help Israel. But the US shouldn’t make concessions elsewhere to do it. As far as I’m concerned it would be treason for a president to put another countries interests ahead of our own.

      destructure

      December 24, 2016 at 6:23 pm

      • I would have liked to see US helping Finland in 1939 and selling arms to the Spanish Republic in 1936. What constitutes a national interest is a fluid concept. Cowardice isn’t in the National interests of any country.

        Obama’s move isn’t surprising for someone who had attended Jeremiah Wright church for 20 years. Where was Romney running these ceremons non-stop on the airways?

        Yakov

        December 24, 2016 at 8:15 pm

      • “What constitutes a national interest is a fluid concept. Cowardice isn’t in the National interests of any country.”

        It was in our national interest to back the Philippines when China invaded Scarborough Shoals. It was in our national interest to back the Ukraine when Russia invaded the Crimea. And it may well be in our national interests to go to bat for Israel. In fact, I think it’s nearly always in our interest to back the countries under our umbrella and frequently those who aren’t. But that’s not what he meant.

        “Obama’s move isn’t surprising for someone who had attended Jeremiah Wright church for 20 years.”

        We both know what makes Obama tick.

        destructure

        December 24, 2016 at 9:54 pm

      • “Where was Romney running these ceremons non-stop on the airways?”

        Romney’s sect thinks Israelites settled North America and divided into a dark skinned tribe (Lamanites; Native Americans) and a light skinned tribe (Nephites) the latter being wiped out by the former in a series of wars.

        I’m more interested in knowing how and how much the Saudis (?) paid for this resolution and to whom. Recall that Marc Rich paid off the Clintons, indirectly, many times over before getting his last minute surprising presidential favor. This combined with the apparent flow of Saudi money to western educational institutions at least in Britain (institutions that then go quiet over hostility to Jews) is a matter worthy of concern.

        Curle

        December 24, 2016 at 10:08 pm

      • >>I would have liked to see US helping Finland in 1939 and selling arms to the Spanish Republic in 1936

        The Spanish Republic were a bunch of terroristic, murdering communists who deserved to lose. Franco is a hero, and one of the great men of the 20th century, in my estimation.

        Daniel

        December 24, 2016 at 11:31 pm

      • @Daniel

        Nothing of the kind. Spanish Republic had the right wing and the left wing parties alternating in power through the democratic process. Before the Popular Front won the elections the Right was in power. Franco had no chance without the Moores, the Foreign Legion, the Italians and the Germans even with arms embargo imposed on the Republic. He would have been defeated had the Republic not been betrayed by cowardly democracies. Communists gained ascendancy when the Soviet Union and Mexico were the only countries left selling arms to the legitimate Spanish government. France had a Popular Front government at the time with goals similar to the Spanish counterpart, but the French, in their typical fashion, had betrayed their neighbours. The abandonment of the Spanish Republic was a cowardly act on the part of the democracies. No different then the abandonment of Finland or Israel.

        The cowards hoped that the embargo would help avoid the wider conflict, instead the Nationalist victory had emboldened Hitler and Mussolini and was a step towards the World War.

        As far as Franco, it’s hard for me to judge. Spain was not ready for democracy and would have benefited more from a regime like Portugal’s, but Franco was no Salazar. Falange had a populist economic policy of land redistribution and workers rights, but Franco crushed them during the war.

        Yakov

        December 25, 2016 at 12:53 am

      • “It was in our national interest to back the Ukraine when Russia invaded the Crimea.”

        Not at all. There is nothing in Crimea (or Ukraine or the Baltics) worth a single American life or American dollar.

        Tarl

        December 25, 2016 at 1:49 am

      • Franco saved his country and should if anything have killed more of the filthy commies. The tragic part was that in the end, he loyally handed it over to a shitlib king.

        Glengarry

        December 25, 2016 at 5:21 am

      • Finland in 1939 was in bed with Nazi Germany. They had to be, to keep the Russians from invading their country; I don’t begrudge them that and they handled an alliance with Hitler as best as anyone could. (Finnish Jews, for example, were not persecuted.) But supporting Finland would not have been in our best national interests.

        SFG

        December 25, 2016 at 12:23 pm

      • Germany gave Finland no assistance in the Winter War. Cooperation came in its aftermath. Finland was all alone.

        Yakov

        December 25, 2016 at 2:23 pm

      • And Yaakov’s thoughts about Ukraine:

        https://pragmaticallydistributed.wordpress.com/2016/12/26/russia/

        Weighing the potential advantages of a cooperative (if not very friendly) partnership with Russia against those of a hostile posture, the strategic advantages of cooperation easily outweigh any from an adversarial one. The main advantages for America to working with Russia include –

        Securing the geopolitical and economic stability of Europe
        Acting as a hedge against China
        Stabilizing the Middle East
        Freeing up significant American resources to handle other potential threats; resources that, in case of hostile relations with Russia, would otherwise have to be invested in Europe

        One consideration that is not a factor for Hamiltonians is the authoritarian nature of Putin’s government. Since the French Revolution, Alexander Hamilton and his successors have always been inclined to follow his example (marked by his deep skepticism that democracy could be easily exported to non-Anglo Saxon cultures) and back authoritarian regimes that provide stability over unproven revolutionary factions.

        And, if I may say so, Hamilton in his era was a more rigorous defender of Absolutism than any French partisan of the Bourbon Restoration –

        Metternich, Volume IV – page 435

        January 24, 1828. — Since the World began, never has a country shown such an utter want of men fit to conduct public affairs as France at this day. Bonaparte was right when he said — and he said it to me twenty times — ‘They talk of my generals and my ministers ; I have neither, I have only myself! — you have not me, but you have generals and ministers better than I have!’ Without boasting, I may say that we have better men than any that France has, or has had since the Restoration ; and France has not the Emperor of the French with his good sense.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 26, 2016 at 3:17 pm

  4. And all the fool liberal Jews, who have been demonizing Trump and kissing Obama’s backside for 8 years, will somehow blame Trump for this.

    Daniel

    December 24, 2016 at 5:16 pm

    • They don’t blame anyone, judging from my facebook feed all the lefties seems to celebrate it as if they won the lottery. They don’t realise that like any other Obama “initiative” it will just cause suffering and death. I don’t point it out to them because in my milieu it is frowned upon not being extreme left.

      Hashed

      December 24, 2016 at 7:25 pm

    • Has the Times commented on this at all yet? I need to know what to think.

      I see “the editorial board” managed to find their voice to complain about a “stolen” Supreme Court seat and demand that Trump appoint Merrick Garland. I wouldnt have though that relitigating that was in the top 50 issues right now.

      Lion o' the Turambar

      December 25, 2016 at 1:38 pm

  5. This means nothing. The US has been bailing out the UN for years by vetoing anti Israel resolutions. Let the UN pass whatever they want and tell them to have fun enforcing their resolutions without the US.

    Otis the Sweaty

    December 24, 2016 at 5:45 pm

  6. By the way, Bibi has been a huge dick to Obama. And Obama has not been an anti Israel President. Carter and Bush Sr. were anti Israel but Obama wasn’t.

    Otis the Sweaty

    December 24, 2016 at 5:54 pm

  7. Rebuilding of the Temple, resumption of the sacrificial service, and the removal of the hostile population has always been the right policy that is yet to be adopted by Israel. In time it will happen. There is no other way. It happened on Hanukkah and it will happen again. Hanukkah lights illuminate the way of the future, not just commemorate the past.

    Yakov

    December 24, 2016 at 6:14 pm

  8. The timing of this is bad domestically too. It’s the Christmas weekend so there will be no press conferences in which the President has to defend this nor Jewish Democrats in the House or Senate. Tuesday this will all be old news and they will have gotten away with it again.

    Mike Street Station

    December 24, 2016 at 6:34 pm

  9. It also just goes to show how much of a coward Obama is. His administration almost certainly would’ve vetoed the resolution if he had more than one more month as president. Obama wanted to get back at Netanyahu because he always felt intimidated by him, and this way he can try to settle the score without having to confront Netanyahu.

    American Jews who don’t care about Israel are welcome to keep on voting Democrat, but those who do care about Israel should think carefully about their political allegiances. Obama is likely just the first wave of anti-Zionism within the Democratic mainstream.

    Sid

    December 24, 2016 at 7:40 pm

    • You’re right. Obama just made being anti-Israel part of the Democratic Party’s platform.

      destructure

      December 24, 2016 at 10:14 pm

      • To be fair, Crooked Hillary would’ve been about as pro-Israel as Trump. Her sons-in-law were Jewish (both Chelsea and Huma have/had Jewish husbands), she absolutely loathes Iran, she was in bed with the Saudis (who are now de facto allies with Israel), and she took pro-Israel stances consistently as a Senator – and if she ever spoke against Israel, it was not enough for me to remember it.

        That said, Hillary represented the past of the Democratic Establishment, which was reliably pro-Israel. When you look at today’s SJWs, you can see pro-Muslim fetishes running amok, the BDS movement taking hold on college campuses, and ever more explicit rhetoric describing Israel as a white colonial apartheid state.

        Hell, SJWs hate Hitler because he was a white supremacist, not because he was antisemitic! The Holocaust was just “white-on-white violence:” https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/02/05/the-holocaust-as-white-on-white-crime-and-other-signs-of-intellectual-decay/?utm_term=.948d020bce76

        SJWs won’t cause the US to change its pro-Israel policies now, but in 25-30 years when today’s SJWs become the leaders of the Democratic Party, those policies could change. In general, people more or less believe in the same things they do in middle age as they did in college, just more moderately. But American Jews who care about Israel should still think about whether supporting a moderately anti-Israel party is a good idea.

        Sid

        December 25, 2016 at 12:53 am

      • “To be fair, Crooked Hillary would’ve been about as pro-Israel as Trump.”

        If she had won, it would have arrested the gradual drift of Jews to the GOP. In terms of Israel, she probably would have continued the bipartisan foreign policy consensus on support for Israel. And if she won, Obama would never have pulled those shenanigans with the UN, so I’m glad at least that Obama got to show his true colors before he left office.

        Mike Street Station

        December 25, 2016 at 9:58 am

  10. So does this mean that the UN Resolution no longer represents an “amazing Trump foreign policy victory”? I’m confused.

    magnavox

    December 24, 2016 at 8:29 pm

    • I’m sure you are, but it’s not that hard. Trump saved the situation with a phone call, then President Obama threw it away.

      While Obama’s upcoming pardons will no doubt provide a fitting close to the era of The One, I will always remember him best for his earlier work, dindu business theory: “You didn’t build that. Somebody else did.”

      Glengarry

      December 25, 2016 at 5:10 am

      • Yes. And I will always remember him for his dindu prosperity theory: A man is rich when he has a lot of money, so printing $10,000,000,000,000 and passing it around will make everyone rich! Exactly like African governments, where the Big Man gets hold of the printing press and devalues the currency to sub-Charmin levels.

        hard9bf

        December 25, 2016 at 11:50 am

  11. You have to ask what is Israel’s end game for the current west bank settlement strategy?

    Is the plan to simply incorporate all of the west bank into Israel? What would then happen to the Palestinians living there?

    If they become Israeli citizens, then in short order there will be a Palestinian majority in Israel.

    The Palestinian could be allowed to stay but as second class citizens that do not have a right to vote. That solution would never be acceptable to the Palestinians, the rest of the Arab world and internationally.

    The only other solution is to expel all the Palestinians. That solution would never be accepted in the Arab world or internationally either.

    The only viable long term solution is the 2 state solution. Now the 2 state solution at this point is obviously not possible. The Palestinians and Israelis don’t trust each other. The continue construction of new west bank settlements sends a clear message that Israeli will never agree to the 2 state solution and is rapidly reaching the point where the 2 state solution will be impossible.

    So what is the end game Israel is trying to achieve?

    mikeca

    December 24, 2016 at 9:18 pm

    • Vae Victis

      Steve Johnson

      December 25, 2016 at 12:25 am

    • Israel doesn’t have clear policy. It has a coalition government with various parties having their own, usually confusing, proposals for ending the conflict and achieving peace settlement. Israel doesn’t know what it wants. It’s a mess.

      Yakov

      December 25, 2016 at 1:02 am

    • Theres never going to be a long term agreement anyway because right of return is a deal stopper for both sides. So Israel just wants to drag out the status quo forever. Or maybe they think that eventually they’ll outbreed and displace muslims from the west bank and gaza strip.

      magnavox

      December 25, 2016 at 4:09 am

    • “So what is the end game Israel is trying to achieve?”

      Israel intends to keep doing exactly what they’ve been doing. Building settlements and slowly driving the Palestinians out.

      destructure

      December 25, 2016 at 4:16 am

    • I can answer from a right-wing israeli perspective (currently in power, and for the foreseeable future).

      The west-bank is considered by many jews here sacred. This is the land of the “fathers”, like Avraham Yitzhak and Ya’akov.
      Also, from security perspective, the west bank is very close to the heart of Isreal, like Jerusalem and the DAn area. This gives major incentive to have security control of this area.
      Another objection to a two state solution is that this would mean a huge wave of “Palestinian” “refugees”
      (“Palestinian” – since most weren’t born in Palestine, “Refugees” – since they live where they were born).
      From neighboring countries, greatly increasing the number of Arabs in the west bank, to a possible detrement of israel.
      Another objection is that half a million Isrealies already live there (though this probably can be worked around).
      Combine this with a distrust of the palestinain intent, and you get that Israel would never allow a palestinian state without a major change.

      The right wing Isreali end game? Manage the conflict.
      A palestinian autonomy but under Israeli security supervision.

      Yoav

      December 25, 2016 at 4:28 am

    • The only other solution is to expel all the Palestinians. That solution would never be accepted in the Arab world or internationally either.

      Those are the same, great, humanitarian Arabs who are exterminating what’s left of Middle Eastern Christianity and the great international community that finds nothing objectionable about it?

      In the short term, Israel should play for time – continue settlement expansion, deter or defeat any outside threats, and limit international sanctions as much as possible.

      The correct answer for the long term is forcible expulsion of all Palestinians from the West Bank as well as the revocation of citizenship and expulsion of all Israeli Muslims. This would still be moderate compared to what the Muslims are doing to Near Eastern Christians.

      The problem is that the correct approach is not yet politically feasible. A Likud member who vocally supported my position would be expelled from the party on grounds of being “Racist”. Nor is there evidence the supposed extreme right wonder, Netanyahu, would remove the Muslims once and for was sure he could get away with it and Trump gave him the green light.

      Expulsion won’t be on the table until the Orthodox and Russian Jews pull Israel much further to the right than where Likud is.

      Until that time, their current policies should continue because they will lay the foundation for the ultimate removal of Muslims and the annexation of the entire West Bank.

      The Undiscovered Jew

      December 25, 2016 at 10:37 am

      • Tom

        December 25, 2016 at 11:00 pm

      • Christians have been anti-Semitic for centuries upon centuries, and only Western Christians have grown out of. The Middle Eastern Christians are still anti-Semitic.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 25, 2016 at 11:07 pm

      • I don’t want to “Godwin” this thread, but what you’re describing basically sounds like what the Nazis tried to do, and if it’s ok for the Israelis to do it, why wasn’t it ok for the Nazis or anyone else to do it?

        Tom

        December 25, 2016 at 11:05 pm

      • Under that scenario, Israelis aren’t going to massacre millions of Palestinians, just remove them to another Muslim country where they will be happier because they can live with their on kind, in peace, and not among Jews who they hate anyway.

        And Israel is only put in this situation because the Arabs refused to accept Israel’s right to exist and waged war and waged war and Israel won those wars fair and square and as victor can set the terms.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 25, 2016 at 11:09 pm

      • Aren’t most Middle Eastern Christians anti-Israel:

        I’ll be charitable this Christmas and assume it’s due to Stockholm syndrome. Near Eastern Christians in the West don’t appear to have antisemitic tendencies.

        I don’t want to “Godwin” this thread, but what you’re describing basically sounds like what the Nazis tried to do,

        Shouldn’t the dictionary definitions of ‘Expel’ and ‘Exterminate’ be self-explanatory?

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 26, 2016 at 3:12 pm

      • That’s true, but the Nazis also engaged in expulsions, and their broader ethnic cleansing campaign implied expulsions and mass murder. Some of their victims were people who tried to leave when the Nazis promoted expulsion, but were unable to do so successfully.

        Tom

        December 26, 2016 at 4:28 pm

      • That’s true, but the Nazis also engaged in expulsions, and their broader ethnic cleansing campaign implied expulsions and mass murder.

        Nazi ethnic cleansing and expulsion of Slavs was often accompanied with starvation and being worked to death as slaves in German manufacturing factories.

        In the event the Palestinians and Israeli Arabs are forcible driven from Israel and the West Bank Israel would not need to starve or work them to death once they are out of Greater Israel.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 26, 2016 at 4:48 pm

      • If the Nazis had simply expelled the Jews to, say, Madagascar, almost all of the 6 million Jews would have survived and they probably would have turned Madagascar into a first world nation that would be attractive to European immigrants after the war.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 26, 2016 at 4:50 pm

      • If the aim is to ethnically cleanse the Palestinians and Israeli Arabs, and other countries didn’t accept them, then other means of ethnic cleansing would have to be employed.

        The Germans didn’t control Madagascar, but they did promote expulsion early on. Many Jews tried to flee when the Germans promoted expulsion, and many were denied entry by other countries and ended up being murdered by the Nazis:

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS_St._Louis

        At any rate, it’s a very complicated issue, especially because Israel’s founding and legitimacy following WWII are connected to the experience and legacy of the Holocaust.

        Tom

        December 27, 2016 at 2:50 am

      • This is why Israel is important to Jews, there’s only one country in the entire world that’s a safe haven for Jews.

        However, there are 50 Muslim majority countries, so surely the Muslims in the West Bank have somewhere safe to go.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 27, 2016 at 10:12 am

      • If the aim is to ethnically cleanse the Palestinians and Israeli Arabs, and other countries didn’t accept them, then other means of ethnic cleansing would have to be employed.

        No it doesn’t.

        The IDF can simply grab some slum Arab city or build refugee centers in the middle of the desert and dump them off there.

        The Germans didn’t control Madagascar, but they did promote expulsion early on.

        The Germans not only abandoned expulsion early in the war but they prevented Jews living in Nazi occupied territory from leaving specified Jewish ghettos until they could be shipped to extermination camps. Anyone caught in Eastern Europe, Jew or gentile, who helped Jews escape was severely punished.

        If the Germans had given Jews in, for example, Poland the option of leaving they probably could have found somewhere else to go, even if it was only a poor African nation while they waited out the war.

        If Palestinians fled the West Bank before or during forcible removal they would not be prevented from doing so or pursued outside of a militarily created Greater Israel.

        At any rate, it’s a very complicated issue, especially because Israel’s founding and legitimacy following WWII are connected to the experience and legacy of the Holocaust.

        It’s not complicated at all. Muslims are religiously and racially incompatible within Greater Israel and will need to go one way or other. And if you object to their treatment now or in the future you are free to go pick a gun and liberate them yourself.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 27, 2016 at 10:53 am

      • That would be an example of one of the other means of ethnic cleansing: invading one of the neighboring Arab countries to put the Palestinians and Israeli Arabs somewhere. This would involve invasion, war, and a clusterfuck in general.

        That’s true about the Germans with respect to the war, although they were fervently anti-Semitic and encouraged and promoted emigration and expulsion since they first came to power years before the war started.

        Of course it’s complicated, precisely because the Muslims being incompatible and having to go one way or other, regardless of how true that may be, is connected to the experience and legacy of the Nazis and the Holocaust.

        Tom

        December 27, 2016 at 1:32 pm

      • That would be an example of one of the other means of ethnic cleansing: invading one of the neighboring Arab countries to put the Palestinians and Israeli Arabs somewhere.

        Quite like what the Arabs themselves have been doing for 1400 years to their neighbors.

        This would involve invasion, war, and a clusterfuck in general.

        It would be a spectacular, easy, success because the Arabs would be powerless to stop the Israeli military.

        Things have been dragged out for decades because the Israelis are too PC to use the ruthless, scorched earth tactics the Muslims deserve. But if the Zionist gloves ever do come off there will be precious little the Muslims can do against it once they can’t run to leftist “international” bodies for help when their nose gets bloodied for misbehaving.

        That’s true about the Germans with respect to the war, although they were fervently anti-Semitic and encouraged and promoted emigration and expulsion since they first came to power years before the war started.

        Again, expulsion was not German policy once the war kicked into high gear. It was an idea they kicked around during planning sessions but ultimately abandoned, and actually rigorously opposed, once they settled on extermination.

        Their example has nothing to do with my position.

        Of course it’s complicated, precisely because the Muslims being incompatible and having to go one way or other, regardless of how true that may be, is connected to the experience and legacy of the Nazis and the Holocaust.

        The Holocaust would not have as black a legacy if the Nazis had limited themselves to expulsion, a policy most Jews would have survived rather easily.

        If expulsion and extermination are being confused then it is a consequence of a faulty historical understanding, and not a true refutation of driving the Muslims out of Greater Israel.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 27, 2016 at 2:34 pm

    • Additionally, a Palestinian state should never be allowed to come into existence.

      An independent Palestine would be nothing more than a threat to Israel, an obstacle to eventual expulsion of the Palestinians, and another international welfare sinkhole for “humanitarian” do-gooders.

      The Undiscovered Jew

      December 25, 2016 at 10:42 am

  12. Lion, I am the most zionistic member of your community. I love
    Israel and have been there many times. I think this move by obama shows he is not motivated by money. So many of his potential post white house donors and business partners are
    Jewish, and he has alienated many with this. He is bravely sacrificing his own wealth for what he believes in. I happen to believe in something else but
    I do admire him

    Wencil

    December 24, 2016 at 9:33 pm

  13. Overdramatic much? There is already a UN resolution condemning the settlements:

    https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/5AA254A1C8F8B1CB852560E50075D7D5

    The current resolution was passed under chapter 6 of the UN charter which makes it nonbinding.

    A bunch of past US presidents let anti-israel resolutions pass: GH Bush allowed 9 anti-Israel resolutions to pass, Clinton allowed 3

    These facts come from here:

    http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.761049

    Also, agree with Otis that Obama has been reasonably favorable towards Israel, whereas Netanyahu spits in his face. He could stand to show a little more gratitude.

    Biffplan1

    December 24, 2016 at 9:59 pm

  14. I’m beginning to think Obama really is a Muslim. He has pretended to be a Christian for political reasons.

    http://www.conservapedia.com/Obama's_Religion

    Rosenmops

    December 24, 2016 at 10:23 pm

  15. some aren’t objective. lion is.

    thank God there’s one.

    Vancouver! Vancouver! This is it!

    December 24, 2016 at 10:25 pm

  16. Meh…this will amount to nothing. I think it is high time to realize that we are not really dealing with an anti-Israeli policy, but simply anti-Israeli rhetoric. Rhetoric means little. It’s like the Israeli Left. What policies does it actually push on Israel compared to the policies pushed on America by the American Left? Really…none. Merely anti-Israeli rhetoric is pushed to calibrate and determine the extent of nascent antisemitism but it will have no effect on Israeli policy.

    It may end the UN, though.

    map

    December 24, 2016 at 11:13 pm

  17. Obama isn’t as anti-Israel as previous administrations have been. It’s just that Clinton and Bush Jr. were very pro-Israel, so he seems very anti-Israel by comparison. The Bush Sr. administration for example was very anti-Israel, much more than Obama:

    http://www.jewishpress.com/sections/features/features-on-jewish-world/george-bush-james-baker-and-the-jews/2014/10/31/

    Secretary of State James A. Baker is surely one of the most reviled public figures both in Israel and among American Jews. In 1991 he became the first American official to negotiate directly and officially with Palestinians and the first senior U.S. official to leverage American aid to Israel in an attempt to halt Israeli settlements. He played a leading role in forcing Israel to attend the Madrid Peace Conference (October 1991), which ultimately failed to yield results, and he sought to launch a second Mideast peace initiative, the “Madrid 2 Conference,” while excluding Israel from participating.

    He demanded that Israel negotiate with a Palestinian delegation consisting of Palestinians deported from East Jerusalem and the West Bank, and he publicly supported the Palestinian “right of return,” which would effectively end the Jewish state. Throughout his tenure, he did whatever possible to create distance between the Bush administration and Israel when it came to the Palestinians and the Israeli “occupation” of the territories.

    Moreover, Baker made little secret of his contempt for Israel. According to the late former editor of the Jerusalem Post, David Bar-Illan, Baker once stated, “Don’t worry, Jews remember the Holocaust, but they forget insults as soon as they smell cash” ( New York Post, March 6, 1992). While testifying before the House in June 1990, a frustrated Baker, complaining about the “hawkishness” of Israel’s new government, sent a public message to Prime Minister Shamir: “Here’s the White House phone number; when you’re serious about peace, give us a call.” He referred to pro-Israel supporters in Congress as “the little Knesset.”

    But undoubtedly the greatest manifestation of his antipathy was his infamous declaration: “[Expletive] the Jews. They don’t vote for us anyway.” This story was reported in the New York Post by Marianne Goldstein and several of her colleagues under the headline “Baker’s 4-Letter Slam at U.S. Jews.” (It’s interesting to note that, notwithstanding the overt animosity implicit in Baker’s profanity, his allegation regarding Jewish voting was essentially correct: running against Michael Dukakis in the 1988 presidential lection, Bush had won only 27 percent of the Jewish vote; thanks in part to Baker, that number shrank four years later to only 15 percent against Bill Clinton.)

    Tom

    December 25, 2016 at 12:05 am

    • Clinton was not substantially better than the Bush #1 White House. He was just better selling a pro-Palestinian policy than his predecessor. Remember Clinton came dangerously close to negotiating the creation of a Palestinian state in 2000.

      The Undiscovered Jew

      December 25, 2016 at 10:46 am

      • If Yasser Arafat actually wanted a Palestinian state, he could have had it.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 25, 2016 at 11:02 am

      • Israel was fortunate Arafat was stupid enough not to take the offer from Clinton and Ehud Barak.

        Bill wanted a “Peace Deal” as part of his presidential legacy and the Israeli right is much more powerful today than it was in 2000.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 25, 2016 at 11:40 am

      • I forgot who said it that the Arabs never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. Had the stupid Hashemite not entered the Six Day War, Jordan would still be controlling the West Bank.

        Yakov

        December 25, 2016 at 2:30 pm

      • I forgot who said it that the Arabs never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

        By Arab standards their missed opportunity in 2000 was a standout: The September 11 attacks a year later killed any appetite that may have existed for helping the Palestinians and now the best they can hope for under Trump is the status quo.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 25, 2016 at 6:06 pm

  18. Can someone please explain to me why so many Jews still support Obama and the DNC? I don’t get it..

    B.T.D.T.

    December 25, 2016 at 7:24 am

    • Jews are the least ethnocentric of all peoples, and they support the ideal of Obama’s change and hope, without regard to how much he hates their co-ethnics in Israel.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      December 25, 2016 at 8:11 am

    • They live in cities, have postgraduate educations, and are afraid of the Christian Right. Now they’re afraid of alt-right Nazis as well.

      SFG

      December 25, 2016 at 12:25 pm

      • They should be more afraid of the nazi left, which is collaborating with Muslims.

        Rosenmops

        December 25, 2016 at 3:39 pm

  19. Maybe Israel should just stop expanding……

    Steven J.

    December 25, 2016 at 9:53 am

    • We won’t, demographically we’re growing faster than the “Palestinians.” We need the land for security and for new generations. The toothless UN will not stop us.

      Y.Ilan

      December 25, 2016 at 10:31 am

      • Your words sound like a good justification for some European lebensraum. What do you think? Can we quote you?

        Mike

        December 27, 2016 at 10:51 pm

      • We do need lebensraum, and we’re getting in in our ancestral homeland. Go ahead and compare me to the N-n-nazis, I don’t give a shit since I actually know who we (Israelis) are and how we act.

        Y.Ilan

        December 28, 2016 at 2:19 am

      • Your words sound like a good justification for some European lebensraum. What do you think? Can we quote you?

        The Jews are pretty well gone from Eastern Europe. A new Lebensraum initiative – which is being advocated from someone who is likely a Putin apologist – would just end up genociding millions of Slavs again:

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalplan_Ost

        In ten years’ time, the plan effectively called for the extermination, expulsion, Germanization or enslavement of most or all East and West Slavs living behind the front lines in Europe. The “Small Plan” was to be put into practice as the Germans conquered the areas to the east of their pre-war borders. In this way the plan for Poland was drawn up at the end of November 1939 and is probably responsible for much of the World War II expulsion of Poles by Germany (first to colonial district of the General Government and, from 1942 also to Polenlager).[15] After the war, under the “Big Plan”, Generalplan Ost foresaw the removal of 45 million non-Germanizable people from Central and Eastern Europe, of whom 31 million were “racially undesirable”, 100% of Jews, Poles (85%), Belorussians (75%) and Ukrainians (65%), to West Siberia,[6] and about 14 millions were to remain, but were to be treated as slaves.[8] In their place, up to 8-10 million Germans would be settled in an extended “living space” (Lebensraum). Because the number of Germans appeared to be insufficient to populate the vast territories of Central and Eastern Europe, the peoples judged to lie racially between the Germans and the Russians (Mittelschicht), namely, Latvians and even Czechs, were also supposed to be resettled there.[16]

        What do you think? Can we quote you?

        We think you should pick up firearms and go prevent Israel from expanding the settlements yourself, you pussy.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 28, 2016 at 11:15 am

    • Israel had taken these territories in the war of self-defense. By all laws human and Divine this land belongs to Israel.

      Yakov

      December 25, 2016 at 11:33 am

      • As much land as possible should belong to Israel because they are the only ones in the region who are not barbarians. Whatever they control is civilization and whatever is out of their control is darkness, regionally speaking. I say this as a gentile.

        Dan

        December 25, 2016 at 9:14 pm

    • It is interesting. When is Israel, by free will or by political force, going to begin supporting foreign political groups who wish to parallel Israel’s political structure?

      Is this double standard a permanent feature? If it is, how can the international Right keep supporting Israel and how can Israel, in good conscience, keep asking for support from the people who it will not support?

      Is this why we have diaspora Left wing Jewish Zionists? To encourage a necessary hypocrisy of the gentile Left, without which Israel would be eventually without gentile support short of Neocon politicians and Christian Zionists who were duped into mimicking Jewish eschatological belief?

      Israel wants their Zion but they refuse to allow others their Zion.

      This is going to be an interesting four years, to put it mildly.

      Mike

      December 27, 2016 at 11:11 pm

      • Israel supports Donald Trump.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 28, 2016 at 12:20 am

      • When is Israel, by free will or by political force, going to begin supporting foreign political groups who wish to parallel Israel’s political structure?

        The issue with the Swedish Democrats was that one of their members proposed barring Jews from having influence over Swedish media. It was apparently targeted at Bonnier media group, however the Bonnier family consists of quarter and eighth Jews. They are so well integrated with Swedish population generally that most of them might not even technically count as Jews under the original Neuremberg race laws.

        Jonas Bonnier (pictured) looks like he could be cast as a Norse hero in a Wagnerian opera.

        Is this double standard a permanent feature?

        It’s more like antisemites such as yourself are always looking for bogus Jewish hypocrisy when in fact it was antisemites who were to blame for alienating Jews, as this SD member was (to be fair to the Swedish party it’s not clear how representative was of the party’s opinion).

        You also ignore European nationalists with whom Israel is friendly with such as Farage, the Norwegian Progress Party, Geert Wilders, and others, so you can tag Israel as the one who caused the problem.

        If it is, how can the international Right keep supporting Israel and how can Israel, in good conscience, keep asking for support from the people who it will not support?

        You don’t have any choice but to support Israel with Trump administration set to be the most Zionist in American history.

        Also, how is Israel supposed to help European conservative parties if Israel’s foreign office can’t get Britain and France to veto anti-Israel UN resolutions?

        European immigration is the fault of the Europeans, and will have to be fixed by them, not Israel however much you want to blame the Jews for a problem an anti-semitic European Left caused –

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 28, 2016 at 11:09 am

  20. Israel has become problematic for the Left. Like it or not, the Palestinians are brown. The crazy quilt of suck on the Left depends on brown to vote for them. They see Israel as an Apartheid Colonialist Enterprise where light-skinned Europeans are stealing land from brown natives. It doesn’t matter what’s true. Color is the only real factor in just about the whole cloth of Leftist Tripe. If Hillary had flown in on a broom, Netanyahu and his people would need to spend about three weeks straight under a sun lamp to not lose her support. Its an open question of Trump. Most of his enemies are Jews, so how pro-Israel can he be while taking flack from Manhattan, his old digs? The Left has to be hostile to Israel, it violates their pro-brown voter tripe.

    Joshua Sinistar

    December 28, 2016 at 7:08 am

  21. I so agree. Obama is slashing and burning everything he hates a a he exits. Other prominant last executions include importing as many muslims as possible with unknown intent and simultaneously releasing as many Gitmo detainees as possible. Many have been confirmed to have returned to terrorism. A common detominator between America and Isreal are muslims who hate us. So what should we as a people conclude from the last actions of this man ? I think its fairly obvious but still hard to believe.

    Carol

    January 11, 2017 at 12:10 pm


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: