Manspreading*

So...came across this picture of two major world-leaders whilst writing the previous piece.  And...uh, it wasn't a good look for Dubya.  It's no better a look for Bibi & Vlad.  In fact, these two have never looked more childish.**  We get it arseholes, now can we discuss actual policy whilst you for a moment at least pose like statesmen ?


* Not that this phenomenon amongst say male riders on transit in any way inherently justifies legal penalties.  If there's room for all, and you're comfortable with that pose, and not a fucking politician having pictures taken for global media, then hey, go for it.

** Hee hee hee...my balls are so big...In case you actually needed this idiocy spelt out.

That 'mushroom cloud somewhere near Tehran'

So I guess this...'article' from Politico 'clarifies' that quote I'd heard from Senator Mark Kirk.

Sen. Mark Kirk blasted the nuclear deal with Iran on Thursday, saying the Obama administration’s diplomacy was worse than Britain’s attempts to appease Nazi Germany and predicting Israel would soon be pulled into a war with Iran.

The Illinois Republican trashed a deal struck by global powers with Tehran, concluding in a phone interview “that Neville Chamberlain got a lot of more out of Hitler than Wendy Sherman got out of Iran,” a reference to a top State Department negotiator on the deal.

But Kirk wasn’t done, forecasting that lifting any more sanctions on Iran “dooms the Middle East to yet another war,” one that Israel will have to clean up, perhaps in a nuclear fashion.

“We should be a reviewing presence to see how this unfolds,” Kirk said of Congress’ role, adding: “Which we all know is going to end with a mushroom cloud somewhere near Tehran.”

I'd assumed that it most likely referred to the only possible US (or Israeli) military alternative to 'the Bad Deal' (disregarding fictional magical 'Good' deals whereby the Iranians give us everything we might possibly desire for nothing in return), short of total invasion and occupation of Iran, i.e. requiring tactical nuclear strikes on Iran's heavily hardened & bunkered nuclear facilities.   Do we really think that the BushCheney administration would have held back in their war against 'The Axis of Evil' if a 'Daisy-Cutter' would do it, let alone lesser ordnance ?  That the Israelis held back under the present Netanyahu government because of...what...this absurd idea that the Americans would actually shoot down IDF jets ?  Because of fears about flight-times....under an...existential threat ?  And under the previous Sharon government and earlier Netanyahu government because...something ?

If there were truly a military solution to Iran's nuclear programme short of actual nuclear war and/or all-out invasion and occupation, I suspect a lot of even the most lefty-of-lefty Western politicians would welcome it (not that they'd admit it, granted) if Israel took out Iran's nuclear facilities as it did Iraq's back in the eighties.  But that ain't gonna happen.  Not even when President Ted Cruz takes office...

But, the 'article'...I'm forgetting..,

Kirk’s office called to clarify that Kirk was referring to a nuclear test in Iran.

Yah, that's what Kirk meant: an above-ground nuclear test by Iran near the largest and most important city in Iran.  That totally makes sense...

Well, the 'Good Deal' is a joke, the Republicans will do their damndest to torpedo any efforts of any kind made by the Marxist Kenyan Anti-Christ Obama, and there's no way we'll see a non-nuclear military solution anytime soon.

So I guess it's mushroom clouds somewhere near Tehran sometime soon...Anyone care to guess which other cities might follow ?

Obama on the Israeli Elections and the Deal, Good/Bad/Otherwise with Iran

Mike Lumish: One State. Two State. Red State. Blue State.

Didn't intend to link again so soon to the artist formerly known as Karmafish, but...I just can't resist with this piece.

Not sure how seriously I can take the idea of community service (as proof of 'loyalty' no less) as a solution to the demographic problem for a one-state solution to I-P (begs so many questions), but at least Mike Lumish has a proposal for a solution, rather than simply denying the problem exists, as seems to be the default for most Likudniks.  And with Bibi's recent pre-electoral comments, maybe it's time we starting having the debate in the West, rather than clinging to the fantasy that a two-state solution is still possible in this generation (Myself, I still think it might have been back in the nineties...but water under the bridge).  And while I hesitate to say too much about the whole I-P situation, my own 'evolving' attitudes being somewhat at odds with the tide in the West, I will say that there is much in Lumish's piece with which I agree.

In fact, the last two sentences quoted below reflect almost exactly what for years now would have been my advice to Israel.  In fairness, I guess I should also state what my advice would have been to the Palestinians, which is to publicly declare that as a two-state solution was clearly no longer viable that they would henceforth abandon claims to a separate statehood, and demand full and total rights as de-facto Israelis, including suffrage.  Which is another kind of one-state solution, but not on Israel's terms.

I disagree, however, that a single-state must necessarily mean the demise of Israel as either Jewish or democratic.

The reason for this is because there is no requirement that a democracy must incorporate hostile foreign elements into it, in order to remain a democracy.  What I propose, under the circumstances of initiating a single state, is that those non-Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria who wish to gain the franchise would need to demonstrate good will toward their Jewish neighbors through the completion of two years community service of some kind.

Those who receive a good report would be given the full franchise.

As for those Arabs who remain resident non-citizens, their children should be given every opportunity to join as full citizens of the state.  Since education would no longer be in the hands of hostile terrorist organizations, Israel could educate Arab youth to the benefits of joining with the country and clearly demonstrate those benefits as young people see their older siblings getting good university educations and well-paying jobs.

By limiting the franchise to only those Arabs who actually want to live peacefully within the Jewish state, Israel would remain both majority Jewish and democratic.  In fact, it would remain more democratic than the United States because the US, for far less good reason, does not allow Puerto Ricans to vote in national elections, despite the fact that Puerto Rico is incorporated into the United States. 
...
I certainly appreciate the dilemma, but since a negotiated conclusion of hostilities is, in fact, impossible - because this is not the Palestinian-Arab national objective - that leaves only the option of unilateral action.
Israel should, thus, declare its final borders, remove the IDF to behind those borders, and toss the keys over its shoulder.  Good-bye and Good luck

And, as I finish this piece, Biko of all things comes up in the shuffle.  Shit you not.  That you, God ?

Netanyahu on Maher

From an old Maher piece.  So much to say.  So much to critique.  But Bibi and his athiest buddy in Hollywood really should be heard unfiltered.  And hey Bibi won the election, so...here he is...uncut.  Full disclosure, I tried to sit through all of this myself....and failed.

Interesting Times

So okay, based on ep. two at least, seems Community transitioned from broadcast to the web mostly intact, better certainly than can be said for a certain Israeli outlet in the opposite direction.  And meanwhile, seems Bibi beat Bupi after all (sorry, pollsters), meaning Barry likely gets to deal with an Israel in which the one-state solution is now official policy.  Hoo boy.

PS, am only the one to get a distinctly Lorraine Bracco vibe from the Paget Brewster character ?

Israeli Elections, a la Haaretz

Just a few days till Israelis get a similar choice to that likely facing Brits. in the next general election: Do I want to support the right-wingers, the slightly-less right-wingers, or the lunatic-fringe right-wing extremists ?  Same choice basically for the US electorate, except that two of those choices will come with an (R) after the names, and one with a (D).  And in case, anyone is in any doubt where Haaretz stands on the prospect of Bibi being re-elected, we have this lovely image.

I mean, no, what the fuck ?  What editor looked at this and thought yeah, that looks professional, and totally unbiased, let's run with that picture of Bibi ?  Are you shitting me ?  And as for that rather unfortunate typo. vis-a-vis the word 'public'...  I've read Haaretz on and off for years (albeit mostly pre-paywalls), and don't recall quite this level of idiocy in the past.  Is Haaretz the Grauniad of Israel ?

Bibi the Babysitter

In which I actually post a campaign ad. for Likud, because I kinda love this.  What is wrong with me ?

Bibi's Completely Innocent and Reasonable Speech before Congress about the evils of Gargamel

If it weren't for that insane 'Axis of Evil' bullshit from the Bush administration (Thanks David Frum !), we might have had a peace deal with Iran over a decade ago.  Now, fresh after starting to normalise relations with Cuba (MANY decades overdue), Obama is working on a deal with Iran.  And inevitably, as with any of the president's initiatives, the Republicans are doing their damnest to blow things up, their latest effort involving bringing Binyamin Netanyahu, a man who has spent the last decade or more trying to trick the US into waging war against Iran on Likud's Israel's behalf to speak before Congress, behind the White House's back, and on the verge of Israeli elections.  Because, domestic issues, schmostestic issues, look look EXISTENTIAL THREAT, NUCLEAR TERROR, EVIL, RADICAL, MUST DESTROY NOW, and WIMPY PACIFICST, MUSLIM TRAITOR, SECRET ISLAMIST, NEW WORLD ORDER, NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN, BLACKITY BLACK BLACK BLACK....no, no wait, forget we said that last bit.

Now, the manner of Netanyahu's appearance does suggest a certain desparation, and one might wonder what is behind the same.  Could it be that Bibi is sincere in the suggestion that we are in a once-in-a-lifetime last-minute existential crisis with Iran, completely unlike the dozens of other times he has suggested exactly the same over the decades ?  Well, maybe.

And Iran, they're the bad guys, aren't they ?  I mean ask anyone...like er, Saddam, er...I know, I know...like the leader of that country in southern America called, what is it again...Las Malvinas...no, no....ah, yeah, Argentina, but...no, she doesn't want to talk about that for some reason.  Damn Iranians, starting wars all the time, except all the times they're...er, not starting wars, and giving money to terrorists, like...er our bestest ever buddies in <dynasty-name-redacted> Arabia...

So what does Iran really want ?  To nuke Israel and ensure its own immediate annihilation, including that of all its ruling classes ?  Well, er...maybe...  To have, but not necessarily use, a nuclear weapon, and possibly still invite...its own immediate annihilation, including that of all its ruling classes ?  Well, er...maybe...  To have the plausible threat of one day in the not unforsee-able future being able to, in response to an external threat rapidly develop a nuclear weapon as a deterrent against a country (by which I mean the US, duh) that has treated it as if it were an existential enemy for decades ?  Ding-ding-ding, I think we have a winner.  And prizes go to those of you who guessed the bleeding fucking obvious.  One might reasonably assume that Iran wants peace and prosperity, both of which are threatened by the ongoing sanctions.  It also, as the inheritor of a once-great empire, presumably wants a certain degree of respect and authority in its own backyard, a want that is completely unreasonable from the point of view of the country that promoted the Monroe Doctrine in the 1800's.  Basically, the Iranians want the same thing as virtually every people on the planet: a chance at a decent life without living under constant imminent threat of having a bomb dropped on one's head.  What radical assholes, huh ?

One more thing: this is a country that gave us in the Bush-era puppet-leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a perfect foil for George W Bush, a ranting anti-Israeli lunatic, and a prime gift to Iran-haters like Bibi, but has since elected the relatively moderate Hassan Rouhani.  Opportunities to deal with possibly reasonable players often don't come that often in reactionary states and we throw away those opportunities (*cough*Khatami, *cough*Medvedev) at our peril.  And had Reagan rejected the (perhaps looking back now far too generous) appeals of Gorbachev back in the eighties ?...  Well, we'll never know, will we ?