Interesting tidbit from Ben Caspit in Al Monitor. He quotes a “long-standing diplomatic source” described as “an expert regarding the entire historical background of Israeli-US relations” who is extremely critical of AIPAC’s decision to push for a U.S. strike on Syria:
“It is not wise, it is not correct, it is excessive,” said the diplomatic source, “Israel is too often viewed as a country that drags the United States into conflicts and wars. Such a modus operandi should only be employed when we have no choice, and only with regards to a strategic issue that is vital to the very existence of Israel. The fate of the Syrian regime is no such issue.” He added, “No one really knows whether life in the Middle East after Assad will be better than before, whether the border in the Golan Heights will remain as quiet as before, and what will be the fate of the axis of evil. The conflict in Syria is a war between Hezbollah and al-Qaeda, between Sunni extremists and Shiites, between very evil and more evil. Thus it is not really clear who are the good guys there, relatively speaking.
“Israel’s image has already been tarnished and harmed by AIPAC’s deep involvement in convincing the American administration to invade Iraq, a pointless invasion that caused strategic damage to the entire world. AIPAC must be kept for consensus issues only. As it is, Israel is the object of much criticism, also among liberal American Jews. Nothing would happen if, in this case, we would sit for a moment on the sidelines and allow the Americans to argue privately about the fate of their soldiers. This would only give AIPAC more power the next time that it really has to go to battle. The ‘next time’ — I’m referring to a possible assault on nuclear facilities in Iran — will be really important, fateful and decisive. It is inappropriate that every time the Americans have doubts about adopting a military course of action or not, Israel should come running and goad them on. This causes greater damage than the possibility that America would occasionally agree not to take action.”
Well, I’m afraid Mr. Caspit turned me off as soon as he started with the “axis of evil” rhetorical flourish. I have had quite enough of that silliness. As far as Hezbollah is concerned, perhaps if Israel behaved as a better neighbor, they wouldn’t need to worry about Hezbollah.
As an aside, I heard Rep. Barbara Lee (D-California) this morning on C-span and she expressed the hope that all nations would give up their chemical (or biological?) weapons. I called her office to insist that the State of Israel should be included in that. No special treatment should be accorded to Israel and if they have chemical or biological weapons they should be forced to relinquish them. Israel has signed but not ratified the Chemical Weapons Treaty, which is tantamount to not signing.
Waaaaaaaaaah. Too late. The game is up. AIPAC/Israel and their selfish and warmongering agendas are coming undone by their own actions… I think of AIPAC as the IOF deployed right here on Capitol Hill. And please ‘mister unnamed guy’, don’t try to fool us by not admitting that Israel leads AIPAC. Well, some bright sunshine has finally been let in.
“This would only give AIPAC more power the next time that it really has to go to battle. The ‘next time’ — I’m referring to a possible assault on nuclear facilities in Iran — will be really important, fateful and decisive. It is inappropriate that every time the Americans have doubts about adopting a military course of action or not, Israel should come running and goad them on. This causes greater damage than the possibility that America would occasionally agree not to take action.””
Hopefully, there won’t be a “next time”– EVER. Not so funny that he uses the words “really has to go to battle”. We (the US) should immediately start the normalization of relations with Iran…(that is, if Mr. Obama and Mr. Kerry have not already begun on the QT.)
September 10, 2013 at 10:49 am
In case you were wondering: AIPAC is not Israel
Only the American people are sovereign to make decisions of war and peace regarding their country’s army; Israeli decision-makers should give up any pretense of intervening.
Haaretz Editorial | 04:21 10.09.13
U.S. President Barack Obama is waging a desperate war this week. Not against Syrian President Bashar Assad, whose country he threatens to attack, but against the American majority that opposes military…
http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.546102
Well whadya know… AIPAC’s gone rogue?? Or not. I’m thinking they just see the error of the strategy, that Americans aren’t buying their shinola this time and so he’s cutting them loose. The phrase “AIPAC must be kept…” is a stark admission of its role as Israel’s operative. Maybe someday they will have to register as the foreign agency they are.
Yes, US blood should be spilled only for (Israel’s) important issues. Instead of advocating a peaceful solution, Israel and its agent push(ed) for a bombing. Who cares what happens to the Syrian people, we’ve got the Golan Heights already!
On the topic of AIPAC and its visibility, I would bet that virtually no one will know who they are one week from now.