[Guardian] Does India have a right to invade Britain?

firstly i disagree on the basis that it is a very fluid notion. there are tons of americans in israel and likewise many isrealis in america. the close relationship and similar cultural outlook obviously lends itself to that. and the visa policies dont hurt. and AIPAC coordinates with the israeli government significantly.

however secondly any country which would attempt to have a strong lobby would obviously hire people and put in charge people from the nation which they are attempting to influence. to have foreigners lobbying would be stupid.

just the name implies a strong attachment to israel. american israel public affairs...

 

^ Yes you're right and that's a very good point that the Israel lobby is very fluid. That said though most of the lobbyists are American citizens and ones who support Israel. Israel's relationship to the US is unique in the US that there is a large domestic support for Israel much of it homegrown dating back to even prior to the creation of Israel. This is a far cry from say if the PRC tried to develop a major lobbying operation in the US, I know they do already but its not nearly strong enough to influence US politics, just imagine the outcry if Chinese lobbyists were revealed to be handing out money to Congressmen.

 

Indeed. American GI's invading Germany were stunned by what they saw. The horror of the extermination of the Jewish people, the Gypsies, as well as many Slavic people, based on nothing more than Hitler's insane ramblings, and the toadies far too willing to please him, shocked and horrified America, and plenty of our people came back from the war, telling stories of what they saw.

It wasn't just the publicized accounts of the madness, but also the American GI telling friends and family members, those who could bring themselves to talk about it. Damned right we have a homegrown support for Israel. We also have a lot of guilt, because we turned away thousands and thousands that could have been saved. Could we have foreseen how the history of the region would play out over the following decades? Of course not. Israel has done much to make a thinking person ashamed, but so have those who have assailed her people, time and again.

Just as our own government has been captured by people out of the mainstream of America, the far-right of the Republican Party, so has Israel seen it's own government captured by those out of the mainstream of the Jewish people. Just as our invasion and occupation of Iraq has spawned a host of terrorists and their sympathizers, so has the actions of Israel today. They play into the hands of the Muslim extremists by their actions, just as their own actions are the result of a form of their own extremism.

In my opinion... and how I wish it would end. The cycle of violence feeding itself, eating the ability of those of goodwill, on both sides, who would like nothing better than to try different solutions until one could be found that would bring peace. People like Rabin. People like Rafik Hariri. People like Anwar Sadat. People killed for their efforts.



Keep D&D Civil.

 

I think guilt is a part of it, but you're oversimplifying it somewhat IMO. I think religious beliefs and a general sense of distrust/dislike of Arabs/Muslims among a segment of Americans plays a larger role than any perceived post-Holocaust guilt.

Also, out of those who actually give a hoot about the Israelis and the Palestinians (and polls show that most Americans don't, although that most likely is changing in post-9/11 America where we're forced to pay attention to what's going on around the world), the most politically active, vocal, and organized group are those who're pro-Israel. However, that too is changing...

 

No, I think you are oversimplifying it. Guilt was only part of what Americans felt after WWII. That the Jewish people suffered so much, almost beyond belief, caused Americans to feel a deep desire to help those who were left. A deep desire to help, not just help because of guilt, but because they felt it was the right thing to do.

As for, " those who actually give a hoot about the Israelis and the Palestinians (and polls show that most Americans don't, although that most likely is changing in post-9/11 America where we're forced to pay attention to what's going on around the world)," clearly I hang around people different than those you converse with, and they must be undercounted in whichever polls you are speaking of, because I know many, many folks who care about what is happening in the Middle East, to Israel, to the Palestinians, and are deeply concerned at what they see happening there, and had felt that way long before 9/11, George W. Bush, and his mad adventure.

Perhaps it's a generational thing. Those of my generation and that from before read a lot more than those of today, IMO. As an example, pick up a Time Magazine from the 1960's, and you will find a news magazine, not a CNN/FOX/People magazine posing as a news magazine. Today people get their news from snippets on cable, with it's flashing graphics, parodied so well by Jon Stewart and Colbert. They scarcely bother with the evening news, which used to be helmed by people like Cronkite and Huntley/Brinkley, newsmen of deep experience.

One would think that people today would be better informed, but I think that is not true. Yes, there certainly are people here who are very informed regarding the news, the world, and current events, but I don't think they represent your average American of the current generation. Who knows... perhaps it's just me.



Keep D&D Civil.

 

OK, I can understand that being the case perhaps with some Americans who lived through that period and were old enough to remember what happened. How does it translate to your 'average Joe' today? Is post-WWII guilt still much of a factor here? I doubt it.

And those would be...what? College-educated? Educators? Historians? People with similar interests and who are as knowledgeable as you are? Give me an idea of whom you hang around with. If I had to guess, I would say you hang around with rather knowledgeable, sophisticated individuals...not your 'average Joe'.

Most people I know or 'hang around' with fit that profile as well, but again I would describe most of them as well-educated, cultured, and ethnically diverse individuals.

Perhaps...

I am as big a critic of the news media as you will find, so we're not in disagreement here.

You just made my argument for me...with all due respect, of course.

 

Well, is it most Americans, or a segment of Americans who distrust/dislike Arabs/Muslims? Make up your mind!

My son's best friend is an Muslim, born of Egyptian parents, and immigrants who visit the "old country" as often as they can afford it. I honestly think we just hang around people who must not be represented in the polling numbers you mention, assuming they are accurate. I think if they are, they are screwy due to 9/11 and the extremist rhetoric of the Bush/GOP political machine. And I grew up in the '50's and early-mid '60's, so I'm sure that colors my perceptions.

I was serious about Time Magazine. I have some from the late '60's that I somehow managed to save in a box at the top of a closet, and rediscovered. The difference between the rag then, and the rag now is astounding. You should try and find some to check out. Just the coverage of Vietnam would fascinate you. They reflect the changing view of Americans towards the war very well.



Keep D&D Civil.

 

Sadly, a sizable segment of American society, I would say. Mostly stereotypes not unlike those some have of Blacks or others. However, I would say it's mostly a reflection of ignorance about the culture/religion and perhaps a sense of 'fear' of the unknown, not to mention the media's role in all of this. Again, there are some polls that would reflect that distrust/fear/dislike of 'the Arab' or 'the Muslim'.

Yes, I am aware of that. I used some in the past for a research I was involved in which examined the evolution of the news media in the U.S. The differences are quiet fascinating, no doubt.

 

Well, hang on a minute. I hardly think the British govt. nor the general populace "harbors" terrorist cells or individuals.

Main Entry: harbor
Function: transitive verb
1 : to receive secretly and conceal (a fugitive from justice)
2 : to have (an animal) in one's keeping <may not harbor a dog without a permit

If you believe GB is knowingly and secretly hiding and/or "harboring" terrorists, that's your opinion. However, I firmly believe otherwise. Terrorist cells have always been adept at operating under complete secrecy in many nations. But, we are all entitled to our opinions I suppose.

 

i think one very interesting flip flop in the relationship with israel is the fact that originally it was the liberals who were most supportive of israel. however after 67 and the peace accords many liberals realized that israel was indeed crossing many lines and turned to a more apprehensive support of israel whereas the conservatives were hijacked by the evangelicals who wanted israel to remain until the messiah comes and destroys all the jews - according to their belief.