Letters to the Editor
-
I Wonder
Podhoretz was one of the signatories on the 2002 PNAC letter to President Bush which declared that "No one should doubt that the United States and Israel share a common enemy" and -- listing Iraq, Iran and Syria, among others -- argued that "Israel is fighting the same war." Podhoretz currently "prays" that the U.S. bomb Iran.
Since they thought it was such a wonderful idea, if Israel has any troops in Iraq?
If not, why not?
-
Israel, the 51st State
I am not anti-Israel, however, this policy is just unbelievable except if u take into account the dynamics and power of the Jewish vote and pockets in this country. Giuliani is clearly going for the Jewish vote and Jewish political contributions which cover the country from Wall Street to Hollywood. Giuliani is a very scary candidate, just what the world needs, another extremist. The scariest thing is that there is a large contingent in the US that would side with Giuliani's views because the Bush administration has so polarized the country. Although Jews represent less than 1% of the US population financially they represent a far larger percentage, should I go on, Perlman, Spielberg, Bloomberg, all the hedge fund managers with houses in Greenwich, Sagaponack and East Hampton worth billions...
The only saving grace with Giuliani is that he has a sane family, his kids, who are brave enough to state their views and disagreements with him and that Giuliani has an ability to shoot himself in the foot. But I think this is a very strategic move on his part. The next thing that will happen is that Karl Rove will come on board as his campaign advisor and the next thing, that Cheney resigns from the WHite House and comes on board the Giuliani campaign as well.
-
Never mind Hamas or Hizbullah
If the Russians are upset about the idea of the Baltic States or the Ukraine joining the EU, imagine how thrilled they'll be to have Israel in NATO. Maybe we should ask Taiwan to join as well, while we're at it. Might as well have everyone pissed at us at once, right?
-
Like Russia's Pan-Slav movement
of the last century, this obsession with Israel is only going to cause trouble for the U.S.
In this case, Santayana's maxim is apt.
Giuliani and company need to do some reading on the origins of the First World War.
Maybe they could ask Donald Kagan.
-
Camps and primacy within the GOP caucus.
At worst, then, that vote will splinter and Giuliani will be the recipient of those who care most about war and terrorism, a group I'd say is definitely the predominant faction in the Republican Party these days.
Fair enough. But will that necessarily translate into sufficient voter turnout to get him in? There've been rumblings for awhile that the fundamentalist wing (which provides a lot of the grassroots organization) are feeling sufficiently 'used' by their nominal allies in the GOP they may not go all-out in the upcoming campaign.
Additionally, does Guiliani have sufficient support of corporate interests to keep his campaign viable? Most of the news these days are on Thompson's woes, but last I heard Rudy's bunch aren't in much better shape.
-
@DJ Murphy
But, they make their own history.*
*However, they just happen to follow in the footsteps of others.
To paraphrase Isaac Newton:
"If I have not seen as far, it is because I have hidden in the footsteps of giants."
-
The 30%
Are the same that don't believe in evolution (sadly it's higher than 30%). They are just dumb, barely literate, scared, so they believe the bible is the literal word of god, (sorry if it's offends, but it's true) white trash. They are just a drain on society, look at what the red states pay in taxes compared to what they receive and compare it to blue states. They are the welfare queens.
-
casual_observer has laid out
A number of easily arrived at reasons as to why this a really bad idea. (I should note that in school I was taught that one of the primary causes for the devastation of WWI was "entangling alliances"). What I find is a more interesting question is why Giuliani feels emboldened to explicitly state this bad idea. My first reaction is to note that he is New Yorker and that this view is less troublesomn there than it would be elsewhere. But I think the truth of the matter is that I don't think he believes that what he says matters. For him, its all a game. Considerring that were discussing places like France and Belguim and Turkey all agreeing, its clear that he knows full well that he's talking out his ass.
But if it appeases his base - so be it.
-
@ Glenn
I couldn't disagree more. Or, at least, this distinction has lost its meaning. So many of the key Christian conservative leaders view war in the Middle East as the central religious issue. They care far more about this than abortion and gay rights now.
OK, we disagree. Guess we'll see soon enough.... ;-)
BTW, I do understand that the money if more plentiful in the neocon camp. But money has to be used for ads to translate in turn into votes (outside of party apparachiks and "superdelegates"), and there isn't a complete one-for-one correspondence or translation.
Moreoever, there is no single candidate who is the favorite of the Religious Right. At worst, then, that vote will splinter and Giuliani will be the recipient of those who care most about war and terrorism, a group I'd say is definitely the predominant faction in the Republican Party these days.
This is true, but because the winner has to be a "consensus" (or at least majority) candidate, repeated battles with lots of small people duking it out for the holy grail of majority will result in some of the weaker candidates dropping out, but delegates moving towards the next most ideologically aligned candidate.
As I said, we'll see.
Cheers,
-
Yes, but It doesn't explain Darth
As Krauthammer's column illuminates, for those salivating for an American war with Iran, the case is grounded overwhelmingly in the Giuliani View -- that the U.S. should use its resources and lives to wage war against any country hostile to Israel.
Though this is largely true, the single most influential salivator is Dick Cheney. I have never had the impression that he cares two figs for Tel Aviv. Is there any serious record indicating why Ticky Dick wants to open a war with Iran?
It's possible that under his stolid exterior, the man has simply gone insane, and believes the Tehran campaign would be a cakewalk. My personal theory is that he judges we are near the end game for securing oil, that it is an end game which will inevitably involve world war between all oil hungry parties, and that he wants to begin that conflagration sooner rather than later, because the U.S. will never have a larger military edge over all the rest of the world united against us than it has right now.
In other words, that he's gone insane Big Time.
But I would like to hear other opinions about his motivation.