Lieberman's motivation?

by: rambler american

Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 20:03:49 PM EST

Mark Vogel, chairman of the pro-Israel National Action Committee, once said, "Joe Lieberman, without exception, no conditions " is the No. 1 pro-Israel advocate and leader in Congress. There is nobody who does more on behalf of Israel than Joe Lieberman."
Is it possible that Lieberman's obstructionist behavior doesn't relate to Connecticut's insurance industry or to his political ego the two most cited explanations but rather to a calculation that he can use his leverage on health care to limit the pressure that President Barack Obama can put on Israel to make concessions on a Mideast peace plan?

Where Do I Start?

by: JimC

Mon Apr 20, 2009 at 10:42:47 AM EDT

http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmsp...

- A veteran Democratic Congresswoman ending a conversation by saying "This conversation doesn't exist."

- The NSA wiretapping "covert action" by Israel in Washington. (Covert action by Israel? Do we have ANY allies?)

Or maybe just these lines:

And that, contrary to reports that the Harman investigation was dropped for "lack of evidence," it was Alberto R. Gonzales, President Bush's top counsel and then attorney general, who intervened to stop the Harman probe.

Why? Because, according to three top former national security officials, Gonzales wanted Harman to be able to help defend the administration's warrantless wiretapping program, which was about break in The New York Times and engulf the White House.

Canaan

by: Andrew Sylvia

Fri Feb 20, 2009 at 17:28:53 PM EST

The common wisdom is that a two state solution is the only solution to the continuing conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians, but it hasn't worked due to a lack of trust on both sides.

There is no reason that trust should spontaneously develop now. Within both camps there is internal political strife. Hamas and Fatah have split the Palestinian Authority into nearly two separate governments and last week's election in Israel leaves no clear majority party and an unclear future as to the tone of Israel's future policies on the conflict.

Even if both sides had clear negotiating strength, geographically a two state solution would be difficult at best.

Neither Gaza nor the West Bank can be considered an exclave so technically both are exclaves, divided by a diplomatically unfriendly neighbor.

The two closest parallels of a country divided surrounding a unfriendly neighbor in the past century can be found with Pakistan and India or Armenia and Azerbaijan.

In both instances, the country caught with territory on both sides of the hostile country (Pakistan and Azerbaijan) found the territory incapable of effectively governing. East Pakistan became Bangladesh, and Nakhchivan has become an autonomous Republic, almost entirely independent from Azerbaijan.

Both bring examples of what would happen eventually if there was a permanent nation-state that consisted of Gaza and the West Bank. We've seen Israel effectively blockade Gaza for the most part, and the West Bank as a landlocked area is also heavily dependent on its neighbors no differently land locked area in far more politically stable regions.

A two state solution is not going to work, and I would like to submit an idea named after a place right here in New Hampshire that was named after what was once the name of the piece of land both sides are fighting for.

Prior to the establishment of either the ancient Kingdom of Israel or the nation of Palestine, there was Canaan. The land of milk and honey, a geographical area roughly where Israel, Gaza and the West Bank are now.

At one time during the days of the Bible, both
precursors of modern day Israel and Palestine lived with independent nation states in what was Canaan. Two independent nation-states occupying the same space is no more politically feasible than two bodies of matter occupying the same space is physically feasible, but two nations combining to create a new umbrella nation-state is politically possible and has various precedents throughout the world.

That umbrella nation-state would be a secular one called Canaan: the name of the territory prior to the current conflict, and the Palestinian Legislative Council and the Knesset would co-exist no different than our own House of Representatives and our Senate.

Day to day administrative functions would be daunting to say the least and would require joint Israeli and Palestinian presences in everything from the police and the military to judges and census takers. The new binational bicameral legislature would require a split between one side taking having a figure take the head of state position and the other taking the head of government position, with those roles rotating regularly.

The reconciliation to make such an arrangement feasible would be breathtakingly complicated to be sure, but the two sides are at a stalemate that cannot end without one side committing genocide on another. Creating a new state compromised of both nations is a superior option to the delusion that a two state solution can ever work.  

On The View From Egypt, Part Four, Or, Gaza, We Have A Problem

by: fake consultant

Tue Dec 30, 2008 at 13:36:44 PM EST

Before the recent holidays and an immoderate amount of snow buried me in things that could not be done on the computer we had been having a conversation about the strategic importance of our relationship with Egypt. Within that series of discussions we explored the influence of the political opposition, and we considered the fragility of President Mubarak's hold on power.

We also noted the immediate proximity of Egypt to the Gaza Strip.

Today we're going to tie all of that together-and the end result of all that tying is that we better keep a close eye on Egypt, because trouble in Gaza has spilled over into trouble in Cairo....and that's one more Middle Eastern problem we don't need.

Israelis for Obama

by: Dean Barker

Thu Sep 25, 2008 at 08:08:59 AM EDT

But take a look at this (h/t Granny Doc), and ask yourself if it couldn't be applied to pretty much any nation in the world.  It practically brings me to tears to think of how far we have fallen in our world leadership and how much we have squandered of our post-WWII hegemony in the past eight years.

As much as I struggle to fight for a true balance of powers in our Republic, it's the reality, whether I like it or not, that not just America's future is riding on this presidential election.

Peace is a good thing

by: JonnyBBad

Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 06:48:10 AM EDT

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06...
"Israel has accepted the Egyptian proposal," said David Baker, a spokesman for the Israeli government. "We hope this will lead to a cessation of the constant rocket fire on Israeli towns and cities."

Israel is expected as part of the deal to ease the economic blockade of Gaza, which is controlled by the Islamic group Hamas. Israeli government officials emphasized that sanctions would be lifted in accordance with the security situation on the ground.

Here is a six month window in which to forge new agreements, new realities. It so sad that for 8 years the U.S. under Bush, avoided it's responsibility as a world leader. We should have been pushing for peace instead of the war and occupation without end.  

The co-most important thing we must do to salvage American politics

by: Douglas E. Lindner

Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 16:56:10 PM EST

It started a long time ago when I learned that it is forbidden to announce polls on an Israeli election in the two weeks preceding voting.  It's a great idea, but it wouldn't hold up in court here, nor is it nearly enough.  Fortunately for them, the Israelis don't set nearly as much store by such statistics as we do, and that is not my observation, but that of people I met when I was there--meanwhile, I don't have a link, I heard of the polling ban by word of mouth.

I think the co-most important thing we can do for American politics, along with public financing of elections, is to apply the National Do-Not Call List to political polling; this would make poll results unrepresentative and irrelevant, and hopefully, free us from the self-fulfilling prophecies that plague our elections and the lack of political courage borne from issue polling.

Polling is a great American political pariah, just as much as money.  It vastly increases the discretion of the fourth estate to disregard candidates and issues before they have a chance to be heard.  The media's interpretation of polling kills new ideas, kills political courage, kills lesser-known candidates--and not just fringe candidates.  They used polls to justify ignoring and disregarding the candidacies of Chris Dodd, and Joe Biden, and Bill Richardson, among others.  Premature polls and disparity in money are the two greatest problems for underdog campaigns in this country, and that's why no such candidate was able to make significant headway in this historic election.

It's time to kill political polling in America once and for all.

PS: I am aware that I opened a can of worms by mentioning Israel above, but I beg you all to stay on topic in the comments.