Louise Diamond writes that in evaluating what happened to make a Muslim major apparently take up arms against his fellow soldiers, readers should consider how they’d respond if the US decided to attack Israel, and Jewish American soldiers refused to serve or fight.
"One recurrent theme in the reporting of the Fort Hood shootings is that Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan wanted out of a military that was fighting his co-religionists in Afghanistan and Iraq. If, in some upside-down world, the United States were ever to go to war with Israel, many of us would find it easier to understand if Jewish soldiers had difficulty fulfilling their duties, and would likely make some accommodation for those who conscientiously objected."
If things actually came to the point that Israel had so angered Washington that the U.S. was ready to go to war, I am not so sure of that.
It is not generally known but President Eisenhower was so enraged when he heard that Israel had invaded Egypt in 1956 that he was ready to send US troops to intervene on Egypt’s behalf, but changed his mind when he learned that England and France, two of America’s closest allies, were part of the invasion.
More recently, Zbigniew Brzezinski suggested in an interview with the Daily Beast that if Israeli planes dared to fly over Iraqi air space on the way to bomb Iran, that the US air force should shoot them down. The sky didn’t fall down when Jake Tapper reported this on his ABC blog.
Related Posts
- Award-winning Palestinian journalist recounts being tortured by Israel while trying to return home
- ‘Almost every Palestinian I met in Gaza believes that Israel’s recent attack will only be followed by another bloodier and more deadly attack on Gaza that will exterminate the Palestinians once and for all.’
- Headsup, Marty Peretz! Another young anguished Jewish blogger breaks silence on ‘brutal’ attack
- Israel Lobby’s Ability to Get Obama’s Backing of Iran Attack Ends Nov. 4
- Journalist/Birthright veteran who is critical of Israel is detained at Ben Gurion
{ 19 comments }
“If things actually came to the point that Israel had so angered Washington that the U.S. was ready to go to war, I am not so sure of that.”
I don’t think you need a hypothetical when most of the spies busted in the US over the last 25 years have been American Jews. Dual-loyalty is a fact within the US Jewish community and it hasn’t lead to an explosion in American anti-Semitism.
Far from it, in fact. Dual-citizenship Jews are given exceptional treatment. To demonstrate my point, what percentage of those spies end up getting arrested and punished?
I have my reservations about Brzezinski, but I think he’s right. Of course, the Obama Administration and the Democratic Party as a whole has thoroughly isolated that wing of the party, so if that were to come to pass we can expect the Israeli planes would be given a free pass to start World War 3.
Chaos, If Israel strikes and their plan goes sour with respect to Iran, they are in some serious shit. If Iran has a back-up plan and can defend their nation without destroying Israeli (occupied or not) territories, that will be another failure that strikes at the heart of the Israeli defensive strategy. Will the US send our troops there in a moments notice, if Iran doesn’t harm the Israeli territory? Sure they’ll be propaganda efforts, but it’s doubtful if Iran is seen as only defending it’s borders.
The IDF could not even handle the Lebanon invasion in 2006 (what was that war for again?) and they looked like total Pansies with their civilian killing spree in Gaza in 2008. Cast Lead was a laughing festival by any serious general. Would Hannibal Barca have thought Operation Cast Lead was a fight worthy of warriors? The more defiant Israel is to the US the more illegitimate they become, and the less likely we will be willing to aid them.
Yeah, but you’re just showing how out of sync Israel is with the rest of the world, and I think we have a problem because we are pretty much letting Israel lead our foreign policy dance.
If Israel attacks Iran, I don’t believe we, the US, will stop them with force. Things are only going even as well as they are in Iraq and Afghanistan because Iran isn’t undermining our efforts there (certainly not in full force, and they are counterbalancing it with some aid, like it or not).
An Israeli attack on Iran will set the entire Middle East against Israel and the US. I have to assume Europe isn’t stupid enough to get involved in that — they were, by and large, wise enough to stay away from Iraq. The heart of our military assets are tied up in a two-front war, and they are strained. If Israel attacks, and we don’t (and won’t, I think) stop them, it really will spell the end of American military dominance.
Chu – I have learned by sad experience that the US will always back up Israel’s crimes past the point of all reason. There is probably no possibility that the US will do anything militarily to thwart an Israeli attack on Iran. The real question is – will it join in?
And the answer is probably Yes, though it will doom us all.
Chaos,
They’re likely bluffing about the threat and their intent to attack. They’ve almost painted themselves into a corner in the Middle East. It’s up to Israel to make peace, but it seems likely there is no future Israeli leader that has the capacity or capability to handle peace negotiations, given the mechanics of their government system and their support of the dirty settler movement.
At least one general has made a public confirmation of this.
Public confirmation which way? Letting Israeli war planes through?
That there was 0% chance the US would stop any Israeli planes on their way to attack Iran.
Hell, I doubt if there is a chance the US would act to stop Israeli planes on their way to bomb the US!
Potsherd,
If the military and political leadership aids the Israelis with combat assistance against Iran, then we are the useful idiot. The Zionist fantasy of America as their right arm, is hopefully being resolved by more intelligent leadership in Washington.
We are not just talking about an attack on Israel if we want to make an analogy, but a sixty year process of subsidizing many wars against the Jewish people, and a dominant narrative within the US which would paint the Jewish victims as the aggressors, any act of violence against Jews as some sort of self defense on the part of the tormentors, and so on. Would a certain number of Jewish Americans “snap” if required to support such a process?
Beyond this immediate analogy we have a good reason why we must have a libertarian foreign policy: no foreign entanglements, alliances, or interventions, and free trade with all. America is made up of so many ethnic groups and there are so many Americans with a soft spot for one or more countries overseas, that it is impossible for the US to go to war anywhere (or subsidize one) without violating the sensitivities and conscience of some American citizens.
I saw a report today that Hasan had been pushing for some of his patients to be charged with war crimes on the basis of their revelations to him during therapy. Such a breach of medical ethics should have been a big red flag.
But there is apparently a severe shortage of psychiatric medical personnel on active duty now, and this always results in people being retained in a post they are clearly not fit for.
“easier to understand if Jewish soldiers had difficulty fulfilling their duties”
And there are how many of those, and at what ranks? I could be wrong, but I don’t see it as a problem. Besides, they won’t attack on Fri. nights and Saturday, and today’s Army goes 24/7!
Mooser, if America goes to war with Israel, don’t you imagine that we will need to intern at least half of the American Jewish population for the duration? (Of course, not you, Weiss, Blankfort, etc., so don’t get excited.)
‘Such a breach of medical ethics should have been a big red flag”
Please check that. If I am not mistaken, medical confidence does not extend to the protecting of criminality. I sure know it doesn’t with regard to sex crimes and other crimes, and patients are warned, if I am not mistaken, that they may, or in certain cases, must, be reported to police if they disclose crimes.
And tell me, how does an Army psychiatrist “treat” a person who admits to multiple murders or other war crimes or atrocities. I don’t know much about military life, but I get the feeling very few things are done in isolation. Get it?
“being retained in a post they are clearly not fit for”
Because we all know that keeping the secrets of criminal psychotics and muederers is what psychiatry is all about, huh? I mean, c’mon, what obligation do they have to the common good? Besides, those people never, ever, kill their psychiatrists. Oh, I guess they kill them only if they tell…
As far as I know, medical ethics only requires the reporting of any potential–not past–crime involving a physical threat to another individual, or to the patient.
The only exception I’m aware of is reporting prior sexual abuse of minors–and only then if the medical individual is considered a mandatory reporter.
Any soldier who committed war crimes is unlikely to self-restrain himself when they can do it again – hence they are potential physical threat to population otherwise protected by Geneva Conventions. Medical ethics absolutely require intervention by practitioner, and patient confidentiality does not apply, unless you can argue that Afganis and Iraqis life and welfare or lesser value than, say, that of Americans.
Comments on this entry are closed.