Dear Wally,

Originally Posted by Pink Splice

> The US public has no clue of this. Most Americans are generally
> pro-Izzy, but they have no clue as to the complexity and
> intractability of the issues.

Nothing could be more true. I doubt that most Americans, even
Israeli supporters, could find Israel on a map.

Originally Posted by Pink Splice

> I will say this again: Evacuate the Izzies who want to leave
> (preferably to the US), and let the nuts fight it out.

Any Israeli who left Israel under such terms would be considered a
traitor by his family, friends and neighbors.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

Dear Rick,

Originally Posted by herbal tee

> In that case, it would show that Osama et. al. have learned
> nothing about the nature of Americans. Trying to force a people
> with as strong a history of individualism as we Americans with
> blackmail like that would make for a true regeneracy. As we are
> now six years closer to the core 4t then we were on the day of
> 911, generational allignment would cause something even less
> dramatic to have the same effect.

> As I noted above, it is not forseable that America would, under
> either party, not supprt Israel. To get to such a point would
> require a series of events that somehow estranges America and
> Israel during our 4t. Such events would not likely become evident
> until after the 4t and with the following 1t being a time to play
> down troubles, the true nature of the split would not likely
> become evident until the 2t. IOW, we're looking at something that
> might happen circa 2050, hopefully dependence on middle eastern
> energy scorces will be a subject referred to in the past tense by
> then.

I agree with this completely. You've stated it very well.

However, it's still an interesting question: What could possibly ever
happen to make 55 years of support for Israel to disappear in an
instant?

Is it even possible?

Someone else ("onthecusp61") later in this thread proposes that
Israel nuking Iran would do the trick. But why would it? After all,
there's a lot of hostility against Iran here in America, and many
people would sympthatize with the need to eliminate that threat.

But I think there's a deeper reason. Let's assume that "If Israel
does X, then we would abandon Israel," for some X.

Let's not worry what X is. Let's just think about what "Israel does
X" means.

Because Israel can't "do" anything. Israel is a pile of dirt. Maybe
it can grow grass and trees, but it certainly can't nuke anyone, or
do any reasonable X.

When we say "Israel does X," we mean that Israel's government does X.
We mean that Ehud Olmert ordered that X be done. If X is a military
action, we mean that he delegated X to Defense Minister Amir Peretz,
the man who panicked and sent Israel into war last summer within four
hours, with no plan and no object. Amir Peretz, the man who's a
total idiot.
http://www.generationaldynamics.com/...070224#e070224

So that would be the issue. The argument would be, "We can't abandon
the Israeli people, just because they're stupid enough to have
elected those morons." The Democrats would say, "We elected a moron,
didn't we?" And the Republicans would say, "We have a Christian
duty."

I claim that there's literally nothing that Israel can do to cause
the American people to want to abandon Israel, once the regeneracy
has occurred.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

Dear Marc,

Originally Posted by zilch

> I know it's obnoxiously presumptuous on my part to consider this
> question, ...

You needn't FEEL that way, Marc. After all, we're all here to learn,
and don't we learn by asking questions? And asking questions
shouldn't make you FEEL obnoxious, if you learn something, should it?
So no, you aren't being obnoxious at all, Marc!!!! But it's good that
you expressed your FEELINGS!!!

Originally Posted by zilch

> I know it's obnoxiously presumptuous on my part to consider this
> question, but what possible positive effect on his cause and upon
> his terrorist troops has been achieved, by the very long void of
> any statement or appearance of the feared leader of al Qaeda at
> this point in time? Where is the guy? Why isn't he saying anything
> now? Is his cause simply running on auto-pilot? Are his followers
> so committed that they need no encouraging word from their great
> leader?

Osama bin Laden has conducted or participated in terrorist attacks on
the World Trade Center in 1993, on American embassies in Kenya and
Tanzania in 1998, on the USS Cole in Yemen in 2000, in Washington and
New York on 9/11/2001, on tourist locations in Bali in 2000 and 2005,
on the Madrid subways on March 1, 2003, on the London subways on July
7, 2005, and numerous other terrorist acts in Tunisia, Turkey,
Casablanca, Riyadh, Egypt, Iraq and Iran.

And you're just asking now why bin Laden hopes to achieve by a
terrorist attack on American soil?

Originally Posted by zilch

> Personally I think the guy's dead, or so embarrassingly
> incapacitated that any statement could easily be diciphered as a
> fraud or an appearance would have the opposite inspirational
> effect.

If this is really an issue, then just replace bin Laden's name with
that of his second in command, Ayman al-Zawahiri.

However, I believe most analysts believe that if bin Laden were dead,
it would be such a huge deal among the al-Qaeda leadership that it
would quickly spread to the outer world, and we would all know.
That's why most analysts believe that bin Laden is still alive.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

If this is really an issue, then just replace bin Laden's name with that of his second in command, Ayman al-Zawahiri.

Right, and just replace Moses, Jesus or Hitler's name with... I'm drawing a blank here.

The point is bin Laden's name is fused with explosive political power and propaganda value. Who benefits most from keeping him in the game of life, dude? Al Qaeda? Democratics or Bush?

That is the question, John.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

Dear Wally,

Nothing could be more true. I doubt that most Americans, even
Israeli supporters, could find Israel on a map.

I can find both Beersheba and Dimona on a map- and so can every other tactical driver in the world. Remember the old joke: War is God's way of teaching Americans geography. I have a bad feeling about this...

Any Israeli who left Israel under such terms would be considered a
traitor by his family, friends and neighbors.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

You are correct, John. I do not see how we can fix this, though. We *may* find ourselves the recipients of a new Diaspora in the not-too-distant future.

Originally Posted by herbal tee

In that case, it would show that Osama et. al. have learned nothing about the nature of Americans. Trying to force a people with as strong a history of individualism as we Americans with blackmail like that would make for a true regeneracy. As we are now six years closer to the core 4t then we were on the day of 911, generational allignment would cause something even less dramatic to have the same effect.

As I noted above, it is not forseeable that America would, under either party, not support Israel. To get to such a point would require a series of events that somehow estranges America and Israel during our 4t. Such events would not likely become evident until after the 4t and with the following 1t being a time to play down troubles, the true nature of the split would not likely become evident until the 2t. IOW, we're looking at something that might happen circa 2050, hopefully dependence on middle eastern energy scorces will be a subject referred to in the past tense by then.

If the Izzies were attacked, our response would be close to the reaction of an attack on the UK. Cue Slim Pickens and Battle Hymn Of The Republic/When Johnny Comes Marching Home Again...

Every once in a while, I swing by Aljazeera for a view of the various Middle Eastern situations from the other side of the fence. I'll provide hooks to one particular article, The Tragedy of Condoleezza Rice, which surely isn't the only way of looking at the situation, but gives a better account of why nothing came out of the last round of talks than I saw in any of the Western news sources.

One theme is a pity on behalf of the Aljezeera reporter for poor Condi...

For discussion purposes only...

At Mecca, the Islamic movement Hamas had pledged to respect past agreements between the pLO and Israel, an implicit recognition of the Jewish state and therefore a big stride towards meeting the terms imposed by the Quartet (United States, Russia, EU and UN) for resumed cooperation and funding of the palestinian government.

It seemed that Saudi Arabia’s mediation had managed not only to avert a full-blown palestinian civil war but also to allow the lifting of the crippling international boycott of the Hamas government, which has reduced the palestinians to abject penury over the past year.

The hope was that the much heralded summit on 19 February, between Israeli prime Minister Ehud Olmert and palestinian Authority president Mahmud Abbas, which Rice was to chair, would jump-start talks on substantive issues such as borders, refugees and Jerusalem.

In the event, of course, nothing of the sort happened. The meeting turned into an acrimonious shouting match. Olmert accused Abbas of betraying him by doing a deal with Hamas, a movement Israel wants to destroy not co-opt. Abbas retorted angrily that he had given Olmert no such promise and that his priority was to stop an intra-palestinian war.

The outcome had in fact been decided before Rice even touched down in Israel. Olmert had phoned George Bush on 16 February, and had secured a private assurance from him that the Mecca agreement changed nothing and that the United States would join Israel in continuing to shun Hamas. In the Israeli view, Mecca had actually set back the cause of peace by legitimizing Hamas. Olmert was able to crow that the US and Israeli positions were identical. His spokeswoman, Miri Eisin, ruled out any talks on a final peace deal with Abbas, if he went ahead with plans to form a new cabinet that included Hamas. "We’re not talking about negotiations on final-status issues," Elsin said.

This can of course be spun the other way, from a western perspective. Hamas still does not feel they are in a position to overtly acknowledge Israel's right to exist. They were trying to do a subtle diplomatic indirect acknowledgment without losing face in front of their own radicals and voters. Israel and Bush 43 seem uninterested in that level of finesse. It might be proper that they aren't. Hamas leadership publicly and explicitly acknowledging Israel's right to exist is quite different in real ways from their agreeing to honor prior commitments made by the Palestinian Authority.

Thus, the wall remains under construction, and bombs and bullets continue to fly.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

Dear Mr. Saari,



I don't completely follow all of this, but I'll just comment on a
couple of things that I think I understand.

If it were possible for a wealthy country to hire a lobbying firm and
thereby make the American people love that country, then there
wouldn't be a couple of dozens bills pending in Congress threatening
trade sanctions against China. The American peoples' love is not in question, it is enough to purchase Our Commercial Republic's government as the Celestials have largely done--witness the Bush family hotels in the PRC and Bandar at the Thanksgiving table.

Whatever attitudes Americans have toward Israel, they come from our
culture and our history, not from a lobbying group. The lobbying
group is merely taking advantage of what's already there. The attitudes come from public relations campaigns as well as the theologies of Modern Xianism and romantic idealism.

I don't know what the reference to "wife-beaters" is, but I suspect
it's rooted in feminist man-bashing. Keep in mind that some 90%+ of
domestic violence allegations are phony, used to extort money from or
inflict revenge on a divorced father. Perhaps you could help me
understand which Eurasian nation is the divorced father in your
analogy. The marriages and the adulteries and the affairs and the one night stands of America with any number of Eurasians are ever ongoing-- one time its the Albanian gangsters of Kosova and next its the harem of Mr. Chalabi. America comes home and fards her face and dons some darkly rosed glass to hide the bruises and then sets out for another tramp in the streets of Eurasia. The marriages are still there (consider the NATO which allows many an Eurasian access to the very easy virtue of the North American who is only too willing to round her heels or the richer and richer heir to the Hermit Kingdom who has his bed warmed for him nightly). America's bigamies and nocturnal visits would put Valeria Messalina to shame. But, she keeps dreaming of that white wedding as she wipes up the spit and spunk every morning of her Progress through Eurasia.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis

It'll end in tears as the tales of Ms. Spears and Ms. Smith point out. But, we will party on in Eurasia for a time yet as our poxy presence is still entertaining to those "gentlemen".

Originally Posted by Pink Splice

If the Izzies were attacked, our response would be close to the reaction of an attack on the UK. Cue Slim Pickens and Battle Hymn Of The Republic/When Johnny Comes Marching Home Again...

Followed by "Johnny, We Hardly Knew You."


But, yes. I agree. And it's not just religious sentimentality - we also see Israel as a Western nation (or why commentators are so outraged when they don't act like a Western European Social Democracy at peace) in a sea of Arabs, and that's a gut feeling of kinship not easily shaken off.

Dear Mr. Saari,

Originally Posted by Virgil K. Saari

> The marriages and the adulteries and the affairs and the one night
> stands of America with any number of Eurasians are ever ongoing--
> one time its the Albanian gangsters of Kosova and next its the
> harem of Mr. Chalabi. America comes home and fards her face and
> dons some darkly rosed glass to hide the bruises and then sets out
> for another tramp in the streets of Eurasia. The marriages are
> still there (consider the NATO which allows many an Eurasian
> access to the very easy virtue of the North American who is only
> too willing to round her heels or the richer and richer heir to
> the Hermit Kingdom who has his bed warmed for him nightly).
> America's bigamies and nocturnal visits would put Valeria
> Messalina to shame. But, she keeps dreaming of that white wedding
> as she wipes up the spit and spunk every morning of her Progress
> through Eurasia.

Soooooooo, the divorced father in your allegory is the United States,
a Caligula who batters and beats women who love him, women whose only
sin in life is to have fallen in love with the wrong man.

Hmmmmmm. I rarely can resist commenting on almost anything, but I
think I'll pass this time.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

Originally Posted by Pink Splice

I can find both Beersheba and Dimona on a map- and so can every other tactical driver in the world. Remember the old joke: War is God's way of teaching Americans geography. I have a bad feeling about this...




You are correct, John. I do not see how we can fix this, though. We *may* find ourselves the recipients of a new Diaspora in the not-too-distant future.

I feel sick.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

Dear Mr. Saari,



Soooooooo, the divorced father No Columbia is not a Sapphic daddy, she is a woman who has issues with self esteem and romantic idealism-- this is an American relationship and not a same sexed Commonwealth of Massachusetts menage (NTTIAWWT) in your allegory is the United States,
a Caligula She is Claudius' wife and every Eurasians town pump who batters is battered and beats and beaten women who love him, women whose only and wooed and battered and beaten again by another, then a third, and a fourth,...
sin in life is to have fallen in love with the wrong man....her error is to be a whore with a heart of gold in a world of whores with whorish hearts.

Hmmmmmm. I rarely can resist commenting on almost anything, but I
think I'll pass this time. I admire your restraint but cannot speak to your reading ability upon the putting of Columbia upon the streets of Eurasia by the pimps & procures & panders of the Potomac.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis

Dear Mr. Xenakis,

If I made Uncle Sam into a rent-boy would New Englanders understand my metaphoric flights more easily. I know you "hate" women but what about Columbia, the former gem of the Ocean and now but a shard on too many an Eurasian sea. Anyway, for New England and its divines:


The marriages (now legal in NW Euraisa) and the adulteries and the affairs and the one night stands of Uncle Sam with any number of Eurasians are ever ongoing-- one time its the Albanian gangsters of Kosova and next its the bed of Mr. Chalabi. Uncle Sam comes home and bronzes his bruised face and dons some darkly rosed glass to hide the scars and then sets out for another tramp in the streets of Eurasia. The marriages are still there (consider the NATO which allows many an Eurasian access to the very easy virtue of the North American who is only too willing to catch his ankles or the richer and richer heir to the Hermit Kingdom who has his bed warmed for him nightly). America's bigamies and nocturnal visits would put Varius Avitus Bassianus/ Caesar Marcus Aurelius Antonius Agustus/ the divine Heliogabalus to shame. But, he keeps dreaming of that civil ceremony and a comfy Cape Cod cottage as he wipes up the spit and spunk every morning of his Progress through Eurasia.

DTH?

Dear Mr. Saari,

Originally Posted by Virgil K. Saari

Dear Mr. Xenakis,

If I made Uncle Sam into a rent-boy would New Englanders understand my metaphoric flights more easily. I know you "hate" women but what about Columbia, the former gem of the Ocean and now but a shard on too many an Eurasian sea. Anyway, for New England and its divines:


The marriages (now legal in NW Euraisa) and the adulteries and the affairs and the one night stands of Uncle Sam with any number of Eurasians are ever ongoing-- one time its the Albanian gangsters of Kosova and next its the bed of Mr. Chalabi. Uncle Sam comes home and bronzes his bruised face and dons some darkly rosed glass to hide the scars and then sets out for another tramp in the streets of Eurasia. The marriages are still there (consider the NATO which allows many an Eurasian access to the very easy virtue of the North American who is only too willing to catch his ankles or the richer and richer heir to the Hermit Kingdom who has his bed warmed for him nightly). America's bigamies and nocturnal visits would put Varius Avitus Bassianus/ Caesar Marcus Aurelius Antonius Agustus/ the divine Heliogabalus to shame. But, he keeps dreaming of that civil ceremony and a comfy Cape Cod cottage as he wipes up the spit and spunk every morning of his Progress through Eurasia.

DTH?

It's all good and bad and uplifting and horrifying and round and square
and triangular, all at the same time.

John