Obama does not make it necessary or unnecessary either way. That question can only be decided by Israel.

My first priority is the security of the United States and the American people. If that can be accomplished in a way that leaves Jews and Arabs an equitable and just, and therefore stable peace, then that’s great and I fully support it. However, I do not think that has ever been an objective of the Israeli political establishment. Ethnic cleansing and colonization of the OPT has enjoyed their almost unanimous support since 1967, and it appears that current Israeli public support is nearly as united.

I hope the ongoing American Jewish enlightenment will enable enough pressure to be brought upon Israel to change this. I think that BDS can play an important role in helping wake the sleepy, not through its punitive aspect, but through its inherent message of dissatisfaction. Unfortunately, many politically blind and overly comfortable people won’t get up and move when the waters are rising around them unless you light a fire under their asses. I would rather see them frustrated and angry with hurt feelings and singed bottoms than dr0wned.

If an American Jewish renaissance proves inadequate to affect a timely political realignment, and in spite of endless promises of undying support from American politicians**, the hard reality is that we Americans will look out for ourselves. Why should Americans suffer and die to help foreigners achieve an objective that they themselves do not want?

**Recall Israeli whining about the ‘secret’ understanding with the Bush administration? These are politicians we are talking about! Most don’t feel bound by promises they themselves made five minutes ago. They certainly don’t feel bound by those made by someone else, especially when the commitments in question are diametrically opposed to their own interests. Thus far, the Lobby has in most cases made it in their interest to maintain policy continuity. However, the Lobby’s power is waning, and there will come a day when their best enticements aren’t enough to maintain American mollycoddling of Israeli colonists and their supporters.

BDS is punitive. IF it succeeds (and what is success is a very big and very important question to clarify), then for the pain inflicted, a greater good emerges.

That would be the best of its outcome.

If it doesn’t succeed (in the many ways that it can unravel), the effort could be civil war in the region, increased persecution of the “other”, long delay in the realization of Palestinian individual rights and national aspiration, further “disciplining” military actions on resistance which civilians bear the brunt of.

If its necessary, maybe that risk is called for.

If its unnecessary, then that risk is a sick vanity, the left or left/right’s flavor of neo-conservative armchair putting others at risk.

Obama makes it unnecessary. Maybe the raging is another voice to add to his weight.

A consented peace and resolution will only be achieved if both sides believe it is in their interests. So long as Israel believes there are no consequences for it’s contonued vilation of international law and flouting of Obama’s policies, then there is no motivation for Isrel to come to the table. Had South Africa not faced sanctions and a boycott, there would have been no desire on the part of a population to change. Israel is no diffrent to South Africa. Nelson Mandella, Desmond Tutu and the father of apartheid, Prime Minister, Dr. Hendrik Verwoerd all stateed unequivocally that Israel is an aprtheid state.

Of course, not implementing BDS means that the Palestinians will go on suffering from teh BDS that Israel has inflicted on them folr 60 years, but that is comething you are clearly comfortable with.

Obama’s engagement will amount to nothing if not backed up by a conviction to punish the Isaelis if they stonewall.

Admittedly I still feel unfair in these confrontations with Richard and very uneasy after. Obviously I don’t give him a fair reading but somehow assume by now and always look for the pattern that lists Israel first, and ignores the Palestinian plight. Seems to add Palestinians for balance reasons only.

Isn’t Bei’lin about non-violent protest? Exactly what Richard demands. Have you ever read Richard respond to one of these articles?

Didn’t they admit they were throwing stones? Surely there was civil disorder, quite possibly a terrorist layer beneath the benign surface of non-violent protest. The stones shows obstruction of the military in the course of duty. Better keep this to yourself. Your job is to balance the anger on this list. Anger = Terrorism. Always starts with stones. Better remain silent. Israel is a democracy, there is law. They know what they do.

The largest way that it makes me uncomfortable, is in the manner that it distorts and derails the civil confidence building (but with definition) of Obama’s approach.

BDS is raging, punitive.

Obama will succeed at realizing a consented peace, an actual resolution. BDS will never. Again and again, this situation is DIFFERENT, materially different, qualitatively different, than South Africa.

The difference is the parity in numbers, the incompatibility of parties as currently constructed (especially by even the honorable non-violent resistance parties) thereby requiring a two-state solution, and the impossibility of masses of either community magically disappearing.

I agree. However, I think the evidence is conclusive that these hardcore racists aren’t going to reform by being asked nicely. I am in favor of using the minimum amount of pressure to modify Israeli behavior enough to satisfy American security requirements, e.g. an end to us being co-blamed for Israeli ethnic cleansing and colonization. However, that minimum pressure, whatever it is, should damn well be applied.

BDS is supposed to make you uncomfortable. Your complaints validate the approach. Hopefully it will do the job. If not, we should ratchet up the pressure until we see results. I try to keep things in perspective: I have faint sympathy for the ‘feelings’ or ‘tender sensibilities’ of a few tens of thousands of racist foreign colonists and their supporters, when by dint of neocon treachery our involvement in Iraq has led to around a million unnecessarily rotting corpses, including those of the neocon inspired ‘dual-use’ embargo (thanks Madeleine Albright! YOU are one classy lady!), and around five million refugees and homeless.

Madeleine Albright – 60 Minutes
We Think the Price Is Worth It
Albright “Apologizes”

It’s interesting how Richard subscribes to the notion that Israel’s doubel standards and irrationality should not only be tolerated, but accepted as the status quo and that the only sensible course of action is for the world to indulge Israel.

Obama’s engagement with clear expectations and rational definitions, accomplishes far more than the punitive BDS approach.

Radicals want liberals to fail, at least partially so that “I told you so” (a vanity, often a cruel one) prevails.

Humanists (true ones) want whatever method achieves the experienced greater good no matter who articulates it or how.