Remember how recognizing the PA and giving them their own territory would supposedly bring peace? Israel is totally within its rights.
Just curious. Why are conservatives such big Israel supporters? Is it really the "chosen people" thing?
Going nuts for the capture of two soldiers was an unbalanced response. It was about as unbalanced as giving terrorists free land to operate in.
Dan,
I can't speak for other conservatives, but as far as I'm concerned, my sympathy for Israel has nothing to do with the "chosen people thing." It has everything to do with the "justice" thing. When people shoot things at you, I figure that you have a right to respond. When people continue to shoot things at you, despite years and years of self-imposed restraint and pleas for peace, then I think that - at some point - a somewhat "disproportionate" response becomes justified. To paraphrase President Bush, this sh*t will stop once Israel's enemies stop trying to wipe it off the map.
The very day that Israel pulled out of Gaza--that very day--Hamas began systematic mortar and rocket fire into Israeli towns over the border. This has not been reported much in the media--we just expect the terrorists to behave badly and don't seem to pay attention to the fact that every inch you give them makes them bolder.
I never have been a big supporter of Israel, mostly because I favor U.S. interests above all others. But I do hope Israel kicks the ever-livin' sh*t out of Hezbollah and Hamas, two nasty groups who love nothing better than to slaughter Americans as well as Israelis.
Until idiots like "Dan" figure this out, that you can't "parse" events like they're not connected, and that we have a deadly enemy that will never rest as long as America is free, then we're going to continue to get stupid comments like his.
Dan,
I thought a little more about your question, "why are conservatives such big supporters of Israel?", so let me give it a try. First of all, there is actually a wide range of opinion among conservatives about the degree to which U.S. Middle East policy should be influenced by our concern for Israeli interests. (The same could probably be said about liberals, by the way.)
There has always been a pro-Arab, anti-Israel crowd lurking around in the corners of the conservative movement. On the fringes, you've got those who are just outright anti-Semites. Since those guys are not really a part of the conservative movement, I won't pay them much attention. Move over a little from the fringe, though, and you find people like Pat Buchanan - who has never had much of a soft spot for Zionism, and has just recently condemned Israel's war in Lebanon. Then, there are the oil companies and other commercial interests, whose pro-Arab tendencies are based largely on economic self-interest.
On the other end of the spectrum, you've got a few Christian "fundamentalists" who believe that a war in the Middle East will usher in the Second Coming of Christ, and that those who side with Israel will be the eventual victors. That's a fairly radical view, but still, I'd say that most Christians do tend to sympathize with Israel, for obvious religious, historical, and cultural reasons.
The prevalent foreign policy view among mainstream conservatives is a compromise between many, often-competing positions, each of which are factors in determining what exactly "America's interests" are. With respect to Israel, this view takes as a given that Israel has evolved into one of the few adamantly pro-Western democracies in the Middle East, and that the survival of the modern Israeli state is essential to U.S. interests. It also recognizes that our support for Israel has to be balanced by a myriad of other interests in that part of the world, including 1) the survival of moderate Arab regimes that are pro-Western , 2) the need to keep trade routes to the Middle East open, 3) the need to maintain a balance of power between nations in the region, and 4) legitimate concerns over the rights and interests of the Palestinians.
While this traditional conservative outlook has often led to a foreign policy that is favorable to Israel, it is not reflexively "pro-Israel." By and large, it has characterized U.S. policy towards the region for decades.
Under Bush II, I think everyone would agree that the U.S. has taken a more pro-Israel stance than it did under previous administrations. Many would say that this shift in policy is warranted in light of changing circumstances - the rise of Islamic fundamentalism and the prospect that radical regimes and/or terrorists will become powerful enough that they can alter the balance of power in the Middle East and emerge as direct threats to the U.S. and its European allies. That seems to be a reasonable argument to me, but whether it plays out as advertised remains to be seen.
Case in point - the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. The Iraq War removed a growing menace to Israel, and predictably, the Israelis were strong supporters of the war. However, the war also removed a threat (and a balance) to Iran, and the pre-war warnings to that effect seem more prophetic with each passing day. The Iraq War has altered the balance of power in the Persian Gulf, and there is now a real concern over growing Iranian influence throughout the Shiite-dominated areas of the Middle East and South Asia: parts of Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Lebanon, Pakistan, etc. (For an interesting analysis, see this article in Foreign Affairs magazine.)
I'm still a supporter of the War in Iraq, and I think it would be a major mistake to pull out prematurely (insert crude joke here). But, I think that when it's all over, we will have learned that there is a great deal of wisdom inherent in a more traditional (and conservative) approach to foreign policy than what the Bush administration has pursued.
Now...to address the "chosen people thing" again. Undoubtedly, some fundamentalist Christians are pro-Israel primarily because they believe that the Jews are God's "chosen people" and that God will look with favor on the friends of Israel. There are also some Jews in America who believe that - for the most part - Israel's interests are America's interests. While the influence of both of these groups inside the Bush administration has been grossly exaggerated, they have certainly made it easier for the administration to tilt American policy in Israel's direction. But, it was a tilt that already had a great deal of momentum behind it. Given the 9/11 attacks, the growing threats to our own security, and the nature of our enemies - it seemed obvious that the times called for a different course.
Faced with the challenges in Iraq, the Iranian and North Korean nuclear threats, and the prospect of a wider war engulfing the whole Middle East - we are currently seeing the administration revise its foreign policy towards a more traditional balance of interests. We can only hope that they are able to strike the right balance.
Lee P, that was the longest comment I think I've ever read. You should consider posting it. It's a very good read.
In fact, if you'll let me, I'd like to post it for my readers. I think it would be good to introduce an intelligenct analysis of the conservative relationship toward Israel. Many of my readers are lefty, and I think they make a lot of wild assumptions (righties do it too). I really appreciate how you admit that the "fringe" element does exist, but that it's not as influential as some believe. I think we should all drop the hype, look at the facts, and come up with solutions (engineer's worldview). I appreciate that someone else seems to see the wisdom in this approach and I would really appreciate your permission to post this comment.
Sure thing...post away! And thanks for the kind words.
Commenting by HaloScan
