Peter Wehner gets to the core of Obama’s Israel fight

So many brilliant people have written about Obama’s full frontal attack on Israel.  Each has said something important, and all are very worrisome.  Peter Wehner, however, has most neatly nailed the moral component, the personality issue, behind Obama’s disgraceful behavior (behavior so disgraceful even the London Times caught on).  Here’s Wehner:

The entire theory on which the Obama administration is operating is false. The problem isn’t with Israel’s unwillingness to negotiate or even any dispute over territory; it is with the Palestinians’ unwillingness to make their own inner peace with the existence of a Jewish state.

Yet in thinking through all this, what is most striking to me is the disfiguring of moral considerations. Barack Obama is treating one of our best allies, and one of the most admirable and impressive nations in the world, worse than he treats the theocratic dictatorship in Iran or the anti-American dictator Hugo Chavez in Venezuela. Obama bows before autocrats and shakes the hands of tyrants and speaks with solicitude and undeserved respect to malevolent leaders. Yet with Israel he is petulant and angry, unable to detach himself from a weeks-long tantrum. Or, perhaps, unwilling to detach himself.

There is in the Obama administration an animus toward Israel that is troubling and may be unmatched in modern times (though Jimmy Carter, as ex-president, probably rivals it). Because of what is unfolding, there will be significant injury to our relationship with Israel. But it is also doing considerable damage to America’s moral standing. At its best, America stands for the right things and stands beside the right friends. In distancing us from Israel, Obama is distancing America from a nation that has sacrificed more for peace, and suffered more for their sacrifices, than any other. It is a deeply discouraging thing to see. And it is dangerous, too. Hatred for Israel is a deep and burning fire throughout the world. We should not be adding kindling wood to that fire.

Read the rest here.

This is not about Jews and non-Jews.  This should align, on the one side, decent people who believe in freedom, democracy and justice and, on the other side, indecent people who support totalitarianism, brutality and genocide.

Noah Pollak also explains just how heinous is the Hobson’s Choice Obama is forcing on Netanyahu.  Of Obama, I can only say, with heartfelt sincerity, that he is a vile, antisemitic, feral, immoral, indecent excuse for a human being.  And that’s on a good day.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments

  1. Danny Lemieux says

    Long ago, as a university student, I criticized something Israel had done in the presence of one of my friends, a Libyan student studying in America right after Qaddafi had taken power. He looked around to see if anyone was listening and whispered to me, “Actually, I wish that I was an Arab living in Israel…at least I would be living in a Democracy instead of a dictatorship”. He could, of course, never admit that in public but I suspect that even today there are many Arabs that agree with him.
    The Palestinians enjoy the highest level of education, highest income and highest standard of living of any Arab peoples in the Middle East, other than Israeli Arabs. Yet, all they have ever wanted to do  since when the area belonged to the Turkish Ottoman Empire (there never has been an Arab “Palestine”) was to kill Jews, presumably because the Koran tells them they should. The Palestinians wanted a Palestinian State, they got one: it’s called Gaza. With their income, intellect and standard of living, they could easily have turned Gaza into a Singapore, Macau or Hong Kong. Instead, they turned it into a Detroit and a platform from which to….kill Jews.  Israel has closed its borders with Gaza, but Gaza is open to the sea and has a border with Egypt (which the Egyptians have also closed…but, who knew?)
    Yet, somehow, in the mind of Obamination claque, it is the Palestinians that are perpetually the victims. Obamabots and Palestinias are alike: they are depraved!

  2. 11B40 says

    Greetings:
     
    At the risk of issuing another Department of Redundancy Department memo, for me it’s foremost, if not always, “As ye were abandoned, so shall ye abandon” with President Obama.
     
    Perhaps the Freudian concept of fixation is mostly out of fashion these days of enlightenment, but that man was not wrong about everything.  If you look at President Obama as someone who has unresolved abandonment issues, he is probably carrying a great deal of sublimated anger at two targets whom he can no longer effect, namely his mother and his father.  When his anger stewpot begins to reach the boil, abandonment becomes the resolution.  Now, a fundamental of abandonment is that you can’t abandon your enemies only your friends and/or associates.
     
    Much has been written about President Obama’s autobiographical observations about how some people react and/or relate to him.  I think that our President realized early on that he has a great deal of human charisma.  But his abandonment anger has turned him into a kind of a “charisma” bully. If he does not get what he wants from you, you will be punished/disciplined, with abandonment being the last straw.
     
    There’s a photo going around the web these days of President Obama pretending to throw punches.  I don’t think that he has ever had a fist fight in his life, but he has beaten a lot of people up psychologically.
     
     

  3. Deana says

    I’ve been reading today about the meeting between Bibi Netanyahu and Obama and how Obama didn’t even bother to eat with Netanyahu.  It unsettles me.
     
    I hope the Israelis know that not all of us are ready to sell them down the river.

  4. excathedra says

    Here’s a thought: Obama is a racist. He basically hates whites, and given the chance, will side with anyone who looks like the People of Color party in any dispute. The Arabs are Caucasians in the broad sense, but when confronted with (mostly European descended) Jews, they get to play the role of the colonized dark-skinned Other. And Obama’s sympathies are always with the darker-skinned parties.
    One way to resolve his own genetic dilemma.

  5. Al says

    Maybe Netanyahu will light the fuse on the explosive of Obama’s ego. 
    The blast could be cleansing as long as we are prepared for it. I would stand with Bibi any day.
    Al

  6. Leah says

    I may need to co-opt your description of Obama. Spot on.
    Last night I had the pleasure of seeing Karl Rove at the Reagan Library. Most of the crowd could have been very comfortably called: County Club Republicans. White, older, well dressed.
    When Rove spoke about supporting Israel the whole room (more than 1000 people) erupted into the loudest applause of the night.
    Made me proud of these wonderful Americans.

  7. Mike Devx says

    Book said,
    > This is not about Jews and non-Jews.  This should align, on the one side, decent people who believe in freedom, democracy and justice and, on the other side, indecent people who support totalitarianism, brutality and genocide.

    In a sane world, Book, you’d be right: This wouldn’t be about Jews and non-Jews.  But it is.

    The Palestinians can do no wrong (to most of the world).  And the Jews can do no right.  Israel is held to an impossible higher standard, while the Palestinians can do anything they wish.

    – Can you imagine if Israel used anti-Palestinian propaganda of the worst sort in history, comparing Palestinians to pigs and vermin, and broadcast children shows where the children and their puppet animals discussed how to eradicate Palestinians from the face of the earth?  The Palestinians do this.
    – Palestinians can regularly lob rockets into the centers of Jewish towns.  Can you imagine if the Israelis did this?

    That’s just two of many examples.  On and on the vicious, evil double standard goes.  So much of the world, including all of Europe, engages in this vicious, evil double standard.

    What I keep forgetting, in the calculus of Middle East politics concerning Iran, is that the rest of the Middle East does not want Iran to have nuclear missile capability either.  That was true during Bush and remains true during Obama.  So Obama gets to isolate Israel and treat them like feces, which all of the Middle East Arabs and Persians prefer, and they all, including Obama, know that if no one else does anything, Israel will have to do something about Iran, thus stoking even more hatred of Israel.  A win across the board for everyone, including Obama… except for Israel.

    And the fool Valerie Jarrett claims this morning that “Iran will back down.”  Why would they?  They have absolutely no reason to back down.  Whether or not the missiles actually fly against Tel Aviv and the rest of Israel, the rest of the Middle East and much of Europe will be under the threat of nuclear blackmail by Iran, and Iran will of course use that, too.  It’s getting quite nasty.  If Israel were willing to play a very dangerous high-stakes game of chicken, they could tell Obama and the rest of the Middle East that they’re not going to do their dirty work against Iran for them, and sit back and see what happens.

    But that would be so shockingly, incredibly dangerous that I don’t think Israel could actually do it.  It helps to contemplate it, though, because then you realize that that is exactly what all these countries and Obama are doing TO Israel: Playing a high stakes game of chicken, forcing Israel to be the condemned, no matter what the Israeli choice on Iran is.

  8. suek says

    >>Israel is held to an impossible higher standard, while the Palestinians can do anything they wish.>>
     
    It strikes me that this is the dilemma (that spelling still looks wrong to me…) that we face in trying to defeat the Leftists  as well.  Conservatives are held to impossible standards by both themselves and by others, while the Leftists have no standards to uphold.  So…how do you counter?  do you fight on their terms?  can you win if you don’t?  If you maintain your moral standards, it may be equivalent to surrender.  Do you consider it war of a different sort which means a temporary suspension of your moral standards?
    Theirs is a much greater problem – it may result in another holocaust – but it seems to me the problem is similar in type even if not of scale.

  9. says

    Suek, the Left has to change the US Constitution in order to over throw our country. The natural counter to that is when we change the US Constitution first, to prevent them from changing it.
     
    The Left are much like HIV and AIDS. Once the Left rules supreme, it’s AIDS. No cure except death. One may function, but function only as a slave to one’s immune system, which no longer works to protect the body but works to protect the HIV virus.
     
    At the same time, we cannot excise, cauterize, or exterminate the HIV virus because it would destroy our immune system and us with it. The Left likes to spread AIDs for a reason, after all.

  10. says

    Obama’s evil. His supporters are evil. Helen’s supporting evil. ozzie likes to lick up evil for breakfast while sitting on a fence.
     
     
    What else is new in this messed up world.
     
     
     

  11. says

    If the Left isn’t going to blow it up and overthrow the status quo, I sure as hell will want to.
     
     
    I can’t stand the disgustingly vile and self-aggrandizing cowards of the Left. I’d kill em all if I could. But not even that would fix the problem permanently. Exile, a solution used by Washington, is no longer an option. Lack of reasonable options means unreasonable options start looking better.
     
    So we get to Constitutional Convention. But that’s not a reality, only a wish or fantasy at the moment.

  12. says

    The next time a Demoncrat talks about civil liberties and the US bullying people, just ask how come they’re happy with Obama doing everything Bush did. The look of their dictator in chief really seems to matter to them.

  13. suek says

    >>…the Left has to change the US Constitution in order to over throw our country.>>
     
    No they don’t.  They’ll just reinterpret it to suit their desires/needs.  That’s their specialty… changing words to mean what they _want_ them to mean instead of what was originally intended.
     
    The “general welfare” clause for example…

  14. says

    “They’ll just reinterpret it to suit their desires/needs. ”
     
     
    No, they can’t. This has been demonstrated by history, not just wishful thinking on my part. No where has the Left been able to do what they do, simply by reinterpreting things. They had to always, in the beginning, get people to vote and change the Constitution itself. Chavez and Hitler did the same.
     
    Their only other option is a full scale revolution. But if they try that, all their attempts at slow infiltration and subversion of the system would have been for naught. The American militia can fight both domestic and foreign invasions.

Leave a Reply