Why would you frame the lack of enough funding and weapons to definitively defeat Putin in Ukraine as wavering on Biden’s part? Do you not remember that it has been the Republicans in Congress who have consistently maneuvered to block aid that Biden was trying send?
So, I read this post and you don’t seem to include the ways Republicans in Congress have been blocking aid to Ukraine. I’m not necessarily in love with Biden’s response, but both pieces seem like merely rhetorically anti-Biden pieces that depends on leaving out very relevant context?
That’s because I wasn’t writing about Republicans. I was writing about Joe Biden, who botched Ukraine all on his own, with no help from the MAGA natcons. Incidentally, I’ve dealt with those creeps in various other articles. Next time, do a little research before you regale Notes with your wise-ass number. For now, read and be chastened:
Bro, this is just a comment on your post where I asked a question. I read the article or you linked to answer my initial question (which didn’t answer it at all). I’m not going to read your whole body of work before commenting. I’m not regaling anybody, I have zero followers and like it that way. I was just trying to talk to you, but sure, be a condescending asshole. “Regale” your followers of how to “own the libs” or whatever chest-puffing posture you’re going for. I’ll go read your other article, but if by “chastened” you mean “shut up and never dare to ask a question of you”, then it’s definitely you who needs chastening.
Is there a particular policy prescription you prefer for the Israel/Palestine situation?
I'm a fan of a variant of John Bolton's "three state solution". In his plan, Egypt annexes Gaza and Jordan and Israel carve up the West Bank. My variation is that Israel withdraws from or relocates enough settlements to create a contiguous West Bank, which is then occupied (not annexed) by Jordan, and Gaza is occupied by Egypt.
I know this is is magical thinking, but a man can dream.
The first step in the formulation of policy is to accept the realities of the situation. The reality of this situation is that the Palestinian state desired by Palestinians would replace, not coexist with, the existing Jewish state. On the other hand, The Jews of Israel are practically unanimous in their opinion that an independent Palestinian state would be a terrorist state. After October 7, they have good reason to think so. So in reality, the two-state solution advocated by Biden & Co. is a solution that both sides reject.
The Biden Administration should therefore declare that until the Palestinian Authority categorically abandons its antisemitic and genocidal ideology, the United States cannot and will not support the establishment of a Palestinian state. But if the Palestinians are prepared to change their behavior in that regard, the US will be prepared to lend a helping hand.
The conditions that must be met before the U.S. recognizes a State of Palestine are simple - and will, as Ehud Neor has commented, never be met by the current entrenched Palestinian rulers.
1. Acceptance of Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people exercising sovereignty in a part of their historical homeland, as envisioned by both the League of Nations (1922) and the YN (1947).
2. Acknowledgement of the history of the Jewish people in the region.
3. Recognition that all Palestinian “refugees” can return to the State of Palestine, therefore upon its establishment - whether or not a “refugee” establishes residence there - the “right” of return to any other place will be extinguished.
4. Overhauling of the Palestinian educational system to teach accurate history and prepare a new generation of children for living peacefully side-by-side with Israel. This oversight should extend to the messages preached in mosques.
5. Creation of robust and transparent civil governance, including an independent judiciary.
6. Agreement to have only a police force and no military, in the manner of Costa Rica.
These conditions will, of course, never see the light of day as their immediate rejection will put a pin in the “two states for two peoples” resolution that has become a matter of faith.
The alternative is the Saudi plan of a “Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine with its capital in Amman.” Since Jordan was created out of 78% of Mandate Palestine and the heir to the throne will be half-Palestinian, this might be the easier way forward.
There is no risk-free approach so long as Islam remains a supremacist and supercessionist creed bound on world conquest. Whether a more quiescent form can replace it might depend on a series of public failures and humiliations, starting with Hamas’ destruction.
No kidding? A careful reader would have noticed that I did “concede” that Trump has had positive things to say about V. Putin et al. Praising despots is one thing, however. A systematic policy of appeasing despots is quite another. Both Obama and Biden have done that. And it hasn’t turned out well, has it?
BTW, I don’t care if people like you accuse me of making shit up. Have at it.
Why would you frame the lack of enough funding and weapons to definitively defeat Putin in Ukraine as wavering on Biden’s part? Do you not remember that it has been the Republicans in Congress who have consistently maneuvered to block aid that Biden was trying send?
I've written about this. Read and learn:
https://unwokeindianaag.substack.com/p/biden-botches-ukraine
So, I read this post and you don’t seem to include the ways Republicans in Congress have been blocking aid to Ukraine. I’m not necessarily in love with Biden’s response, but both pieces seem like merely rhetorically anti-Biden pieces that depends on leaving out very relevant context?
That’s because I wasn’t writing about Republicans. I was writing about Joe Biden, who botched Ukraine all on his own, with no help from the MAGA natcons. Incidentally, I’ve dealt with those creeps in various other articles. Next time, do a little research before you regale Notes with your wise-ass number. For now, read and be chastened:
https://unwokeindianaag.substack.com/p/rooting-for-russia
Bro, this is just a comment on your post where I asked a question. I read the article or you linked to answer my initial question (which didn’t answer it at all). I’m not going to read your whole body of work before commenting. I’m not regaling anybody, I have zero followers and like it that way. I was just trying to talk to you, but sure, be a condescending asshole. “Regale” your followers of how to “own the libs” or whatever chest-puffing posture you’re going for. I’ll go read your other article, but if by “chastened” you mean “shut up and never dare to ask a question of you”, then it’s definitely you who needs chastening.
$6 billion to Iran.
Obama started his presidency with his apology tour, bowing to despots. His “red line” with Syria was also an example of precisely what not to do.
Shout loudly and carry a small stick...
Exactly
Is there a particular policy prescription you prefer for the Israel/Palestine situation?
I'm a fan of a variant of John Bolton's "three state solution". In his plan, Egypt annexes Gaza and Jordan and Israel carve up the West Bank. My variation is that Israel withdraws from or relocates enough settlements to create a contiguous West Bank, which is then occupied (not annexed) by Jordan, and Gaza is occupied by Egypt.
I know this is is magical thinking, but a man can dream.
The first step in the formulation of policy is to accept the realities of the situation. The reality of this situation is that the Palestinian state desired by Palestinians would replace, not coexist with, the existing Jewish state. On the other hand, The Jews of Israel are practically unanimous in their opinion that an independent Palestinian state would be a terrorist state. After October 7, they have good reason to think so. So in reality, the two-state solution advocated by Biden & Co. is a solution that both sides reject.
The Biden Administration should therefore declare that until the Palestinian Authority categorically abandons its antisemitic and genocidal ideology, the United States cannot and will not support the establishment of a Palestinian state. But if the Palestinians are prepared to change their behavior in that regard, the US will be prepared to lend a helping hand.
The conditions that must be met before the U.S. recognizes a State of Palestine are simple - and will, as Ehud Neor has commented, never be met by the current entrenched Palestinian rulers.
1. Acceptance of Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people exercising sovereignty in a part of their historical homeland, as envisioned by both the League of Nations (1922) and the YN (1947).
2. Acknowledgement of the history of the Jewish people in the region.
3. Recognition that all Palestinian “refugees” can return to the State of Palestine, therefore upon its establishment - whether or not a “refugee” establishes residence there - the “right” of return to any other place will be extinguished.
4. Overhauling of the Palestinian educational system to teach accurate history and prepare a new generation of children for living peacefully side-by-side with Israel. This oversight should extend to the messages preached in mosques.
5. Creation of robust and transparent civil governance, including an independent judiciary.
6. Agreement to have only a police force and no military, in the manner of Costa Rica.
These conditions will, of course, never see the light of day as their immediate rejection will put a pin in the “two states for two peoples” resolution that has become a matter of faith.
The alternative is the Saudi plan of a “Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine with its capital in Amman.” Since Jordan was created out of 78% of Mandate Palestine and the heir to the throne will be half-Palestinian, this might be the easier way forward.
There is no risk-free approach so long as Islam remains a supremacist and supercessionist creed bound on world conquest. Whether a more quiescent form can replace it might depend on a series of public failures and humiliations, starting with Hamas’ destruction.
Absolutely and of course the Palestinians will refuse because that’s what they do. Always.
Exactly so.
And that last condition will never be met.
No kidding? A careful reader would have noticed that I did “concede” that Trump has had positive things to say about V. Putin et al. Praising despots is one thing, however. A systematic policy of appeasing despots is quite another. Both Obama and Biden have done that. And it hasn’t turned out well, has it?
BTW, I don’t care if people like you accuse me of making shit up. Have at it.
What's wrong with whataboutism, precisely?
Sure it's bad. Bit appeasement of despots and terrorist states is even worse, wouldn't you say...?
Trump's not my guy, you doofus. Nor is Biden. They're both a disgrace.