[Salon] 'Should Sinwar be eliminated?': From left to right, the Israeli chorus calls for blood - Opinion - Haaretz.com



Scroll down to the article to read how an ideologically fascist country governs, as Gideon Levy and those few Israeli’s who have their eyes open recognize of their governing class, not all of whom identify as “Right.”  

But Yoram Hazony screams that he is of the “Right,” and a “Settler,” and thus, celebrated by U.S. “Conservatives” as the Founding Father of their National Conservative ideology, popularly known as Trumpism. Which pulls together all of the ideological strains of the "US Right,” under Trumpism, with the Claremont Institute and Hillsdale College serving as the Straussian sources of the ideology, which is readily apparent with only the slightest research/analysis, as the current manifestation of the style of fascism that Leo Strauss and his ideological collaborators could only dream of in their day. They being in the post-WW II days when “democracy” was yet so hallowed in the US, before being pulled down by those same right-wing fanatics, while pulling along their militaristic allies of the Democratic Party to the same manner of ultra-miltarist thinking, as we see with the Biden administration. 

Roberta Wohlstetter, wife of Albert, in perhaps the only point I would agree with her on, once stated: that “the pictures of the world the government officials build from intelligence . . . are not so much a matter of the ‘facts’ their sources make available as they are a function of the ‘theories' about politics already in their minds which guide both their recognition and their interpretation of ‘facts.’” 

That is the soundest reason to study the “political theory” motivating political decision-making and “world-views,” which must begin with our own US parties/politicians, and of the ideologists who first “create” the “pictures of the world” they then draw upon for policy, as uncomfortable as that may be to Americans. Which explains why that will never be acceptable to Americans as it would reveal we have much more in common, as does our closest “ally,” Israel, with their extreme-right governance, which Hazony also serves as ideologist and enabler to, to the militaristic policies/ideologies of our one-time WW II enemies.  
P.S.
I don’t find inciting war against China necessarily preferable to the same against Russia, as whichever order our aggression goes first, it inevitably will include the other, as we’ve seen in the planning and incitement since 1991.  

A person wearing glasses and a suit

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Yoram Hazony

 @yhazony

If the PLO wanted a Palestinian state, there would have been one 15 years ago. The desperation for a PLO state comes from Obama and the EU.

1:38 PM · Dec 26, 2016·Twitter Web Client

A person wearing glasses and a suit

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Yoram Hazony

 @yhazony

Dec 26, 2016

You're mistaken. Settlements are the only effective tool Israel has to pressure the PLO to cut a deal.

3A person wearing glasses and a suit

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

 Yoram Hazony

 @yhazony

Dec 26, 2016

Israelis want an undivided Jerusalem and our army on the Jordan River. There is overwhelming, unchanging consensus on that.

'Should Sinwar be eliminated?': From left to right, the Israeli chorus calls for blood - Opinion - Haaretz.com

This is what inflammatory discourse looks like: Media outlets and social media are inundated with calls to murder the leader of a political movement – even if it is a religious, extremist and violent one – with a bloodthirsty quest for vengeance. This is what a uniform raucous chorus looks like too: from left-wing Meretz (Uri Zaki) to the Kahanists, from journalists Amnon Abramovich (TV Channel 12) to Ben Caspit (Maariv), every single one of them is calling for the elimination of Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar. One state, one voice.

They are competing for the appropriate epithet worthy of him, scoundrel or scum. Oh, such patriots! If only it were possible, stoning him in the city square would attract multitudes to the festivities. The nation will make do with at least bringing about his death by any other means. This is the only response the state of Israel, led by the inflammatory media, can offer in the wake of terror attacks.

The latest one was particularly gruesome: It was carried out with axes. But is murder by axe really crueller than any other kind? The axe is emblematic of the weakness of someone who might dream of killing by plane in the middle of the night. But he didn’t have a plane, not even a cannon.

Obviously, murder with an axe is barbaric, but how is it different than the killing of a 19-year-old girl innocently traveling in a taxi before being shot dead by a soldier? In what, in the intent? Didn’t the soldier have an intent to kill while firing live ammunition at a taxi full of women in Jenin? What other intention did he have?

Such questions arise after every terror attack, just like Israel’s knee-jerk response, which repeats itself in a manner that can only lead one to despair. Not forgetting a thing and not learning a thing – how many times will assassination be proposed as a solution, even though all previous times it was to no avail, in most cases causing even more damage.

Even if one sets aside the question of the legality or morality of a state executing people without trial, there is the question of its effectiveness, which has never been proven.

One can also somehow ignore the repulsive and pathetic image of the media, which almost unanimously embarked on a campaign, demanding more assassinations, more invasions, more conquests.

One cannot forget that in Israel, assassinations are also a political matter. It’s not just the targets that are political – people who in law-abiding states are not legitimate targets – the actual killings are political. They are meant to placate political needs and objectives, showing the public that “something is being done.” An instant solution.

It’s doubtful whether there is an area in which Israeli media are so unified and influential, expressing the lust of the masses, pushing for carrying out violent revenge attacks. “Should Sinwar be eliminated?” asked a caption on newsfeeds earlier this week, as if this were a reality show. Murder by demand. The large number of such killings has masked the illegitimate atmosphere in which the conversation about the response to these attacks is being conducted.

Sinwar is not the worst of enemies. His successor will be worse. Sinwar will also not be the first Yahya of Hamas that Israel eliminates to no avail. The removal of Yahya Ayyash, his predecessor, didn’t give Israel anything but a wave of suicide bombings in which 60 Israelis were killed.

Reducing the problem posed by terror attacks to a single leader is a cowardly evasion of contending with the real issues. As if terror does not stem from the blockade, the occupation, the brutality of policemen at the al-Aqsa Mosque, the violence of settlers and the killing of innocents in the West Bank. As if terror were personified in Sinwar, only Sinwar. If terror is Sinwar, let’s kill him, and calm will be restored.

If terror is related to the Shalit prisoner exchange, in which Sinwar was set free after 23 years in prison, then it has an easy solution. No prisoner release, only assassinations, “deterrence,” and peace will be restored. Israel has tried this one thousand and one times with no success. It won’t work now either.

Obviously, we can’t remain silent in the face of terror. On the contrary, we should talk about it. With the living Sinwar. Talk to him, directly or indirectly, on removing the blockade. Talk to him about the rights his people have been deprived of, about their trampled dignity. We have never, but never, tried this in earnest.



This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail (Mailman edition) and MHonArc.