Home | About | Donate

Defending Israel’s Attacks on Civilians—A Harbinger for Clinton’s Presidency?


#1

Defending Israel’s Attacks on Civilians—A Harbinger for Clinton’s Presidency?

Stephen Zunes

A fight is brewing as Democrats prepare to debate U.S. policy on Israel at their national convention in July. Bernie Sanders’ appointees to the platform committee Cornel West and James Zogby plan to challenge the party establishment’s uncritical support for an increasingly aggressive, right wing Israeli government.


#2

With Clinton's and Wasserman-Schultz's platform committee members outnumbering Sanders 2 to 1, I have little hope the Democratic Party will do anything approaching the right thing in regards to the US position on Israel and the Palestinian people.

Before the second intifada, Palestinians deaths occurred at the rate of 4 to 1. Now they occur at a rate of 6 to 1.
Those Palestinian corpses are the difference between launching a bottle rocket and a stick of dynamite.

It's a conversation worth having for sure, as will be the ones on other issue planks, but Democrats are neither required to run on the Party platform, nor are they required to govern based on the Party's platform. This Party is bent from the ground up.


#4

Thank you Steven Zunes. The very fact that Steven Zunes is writing this is a testament to the success of Bernie Sanders campaign. It has resulted in a conversation that America was not having about our international positions and our wars. This IS the proper forum in our democracy to work this out, and I have no doubt that win or lose; Bernie's delegates and committee members will make their position known, to the benefit of all. May Bernie win California...


#5

We all must have compassion for Hillary's ignorance and callous personality. To place her in a position of power on the other hand would continue to place many people in harm's way.


#6

Should we also have compassion for Clinton's addiction to corporate money ?


#9

Yes, Netanyahu is pulling all the levers to get NATO (read "The U.S.") to attack and devastate it's only remaining critic in the Middle East: Iran. Clinton would be so pleased to help him.


#10

Hillary Clinton has been an Israeli war-crimes apologist and shill for a long time - her nose buried up Israel's political ass. Hillary's central role in the coup and destruction of Libya and its society one example, the ethnic cleansing of Palestine to be for Jews only another, and the murders of Americans by Israeli forces with nary a peep of protest another!.
Hillary has many times prostrated herself before the Israeli lobby and sold-out American sovereignty - she is not alone in that perfidy!


A Clinton presidency would see the end of even the marginal normalization with Iran to assuage Israeli war, terrorism and expansionist racism in the area.

Either an American work for American interests or they commit treason by working for the interests of a foreign power - no other nation allows such overt subversion of their sovereignty as we do - why?


#11

Clinton sez: I'll send American soldiers to die so Israeli soldiers don't have to.


#12

Hey folks! Given Hillary's support for Morocco's occupation of Western Sahara, her support for the invasion of Iraq, her support for the Honduras coup, her backing of various Arab dictatorships, etc., I really don't think her support for Israeli war crimes is about "Zionist money." She doesn't support human rights or international law pretty much anywhere!


#13

The thing is that Trump might easily end up being worse on all counts.


#14

The logic that follows from of Clinton's thinking is that Vietnam has every right to drop a nuclear bomb on Washington DC in return for the USA's bombing of Hanoi.


#15

► I saw that moment televised. It got no reaction from the news desks


#17

► As I remember it, one of the Castro brothers from San Antonio asked for a voice vote a few times, and each time the response was against the motion. Castro just looked bewildered, gave up on asking again, and pronounced the motioned passed anyway

Wait a minute, here it is: https://youtu.be/zoPrBnrWvrE


#21

I think she is psychologically off a bit too but that they are covering it up. Like she could snap and lose it. I agree with all those things you listed except about mowing down protesters like Thatcher. I think Hillory would be left unphased by them. Maybe try that free speech zones crap two blocks out of the way etc.

I do think Trump would not respect people's right to assembly and protest. I mean that. The guy says protesters deserved getting roughed up now but what about later if he is in office? I think America would soon have great trouble with a Trump presidency that everybody would come to regret because of how bad things got for everybody everywhere.

I think she would expand the endless war and make facile excuses for the occupation instead of trying to broker a peace but I don't see nuclear war in her bag of tricks. That is a lot to accept! I do see her stupidly pressuring Russia with NATO (mostly because it is a neocon habit forming drug).

However I actually am worrying more about a militarizing China and there I can see the necessary causes and effects that could evolve into WW3! There is no real benefit to a European conflict with Russia. At most a larger proxy war is possible but the real contests of the future will locate not in the Mediterranean but in the Asian Pacific sphere. Things have already become incredibly hot in such a short time that it almost seems that Putin and Russia are merely a diversionary distraction meant to turn people's eyes away from the stuff happening along the Asian Shore. Trump wants to wave sabers that he has never held himself. When you talk about WW3 and nukes you hear Trump's name come up. He is emotionally incapable of the judgement necessary to avoid a major war.

America and the world need Bernie's calm and measured intelligence and decency more than ever before. So much would be better for us all if he is given a fair shake.

He crush the billionaire oligarch hopes to become Super Trump and the world could get on with surviving the coming Anthropocene Era.


#23

I am not one of those who sees things in only black or white. There are degrees of good and degrees of bad, no two people are the same and yes I will vote for Bernie but they have rigged the game on us. What do I do then if they cheat us out of having Bernie run?

Sigh. That is like choosing which executioner do I prefer? The one with a bow and arrow or the one with a rifle. Sure they will both try to do me in but I'd choose the least dangerous even if it were only marginally less dangerous.

That is why I am opposed to Trump. He has the gun and I have a slightly better chance of surviving an arrow than of surviving a bullet. That is just the way I think.

You don't elect a multibillionaire oligarch if you want to fight the rise of oligarchy.

You don't elect a climate change denier if you want to fight climate change.

That is how I see it.


#25

Except in my analogy it is Trump who holds the gun and Hillary the bow and arrow. People are thinking Bernie the independent in the back of their minds when they view Trump. It makes them think he is something of a republican outsider and the repubs have gone along with it because it was necessary in this anti politics as usual election. However Trump is no rebel nor revolutionary nor even much of an outsider republican. He is a conservative billionaire oligarch with an autocratic personality and is used to getting his way regardless of laws and regulations etc. in short a racist, fascist oligarch republican conservative.

Trump is more like Obama in that he has no prior political experience. That is no guarantee of anything as Obama the drone master shows. Trump is going to mess with the Chinese and hard too. Practically right out of the gate, he will focus on pushing and goading the chinese. I don't care whether people aren't talking about it yet. Nor pundits warning about it yet. Trump will confront (in his mind) what he considers the foreign policy priority - China.

Secondly Trump is a climate change denier and that is far more dangerous than people realize at this critical point. As people divest from fossil fuels, Trump will reinvest time, money and effort in support of fossil fuel use. Moreover I do not think Trump would change anything in the Mid East and would pretty much replicate Hillary's positions.

A climate change denier is insane. Electing a heavy duty oligarch is insane if you want to stop oligarchy's taking over.

Trump is wearing a populist camouflage that makes him sound like he is an independent but he isn't. In fact tell me where you think Trump differs from the usual Republican line on anything? It is also an illusion that the repubs claim that they don't like him. They are just biding their time hoping Hillary can screw Bernie because they know Hillary is so compromised and vulnerable that they believe Trump will win if she is the nominee and that will mean they get corporate deregulation and climate change denial etc. everything repubs want including renewed interest in fossil fuel use.

I think Trump will make Trade Deals unnecessary because he will see that deregulation will start at home. So he says not fade deals but will institute their provisions here in America ( like an internal trade deal economic climate of deregulation and corporatocracy).