[Peace-discuss] Israel and Aid…

[C. G. Estabrook]

But it's not the case that "American wealth and influence is being sacrificed
for [Israel]."  There's no altruism or misapprehension on the part of the 
American government.

Nor is it the case that Israel "does not benefit ... U.S. elites and 
corporations." Of course it does; the corporations would move out if it didn't.


Morton K. Brussel wrote:
> David,
> 
> As I replied to Carl, none of this pertains to what Nader wrote, or was 
> trying to do in writing. In that connection, relative to your question 3), it
> is not an either/or issue. It */is/ *useful to show that supporting the
> Palestinians is worthwhile no matter what, given the situation, the
> oppression, they face, and it is also */useful/* in changing U.S. public
> opinion to show that American wealth and influence is being sacrificed for a
> country that does not deserve it, and which in any case does not benefit the
> U.S. (or even U.S. elites and corporations).  If this can stop or decrease
> our support of Israel, in my mind those are all worthwhile ends.  This does
> not at all preclude a scathing critique of the U.S. corporate/imperial aims
> and wars, or a discussion that acknowledges that (some or even most) things
> Israel does is in furtherance of those aims. Not */everything/* it does
> furthers those aims.
> 
> You seem to believe that there has to be an acknowledgment that whatever 
> Israel does is in furtherance of U.S. objectives. I disagree, and so does
> Nader.
> 
> Other small remarks…
> 
> On Mar 24, 2010, at 1:00 PM, David Green wrote:
> 
>> Mort, I need to write another article that puts all this in a clearer 
>> context, but, building on Carl's questions, the questions remain:
>> 
>> 1. How does supporting unprincipled behavior on behalf of U.S "interests"
>> help to support principled behavior on behalf of the Palestinians?
> 
> Is Nader supporting such unprincipled behavior…?
> 
> 
>> 2. Can principled (right, just) outcomes come from an unprincipled 
>> analysis?
> 
> Yes, but that (unprincipled analysis) is not the issue in Nader's article.
>> 
>> 3. Is it even pragmatically worthwhile to argue the Palestinians case on
>> the basis of U.S. "interests."?
>> 
>> My answers are: it doesn't, no, and no.
> 
> A discussion of what is in the interests of the USA is not simple.
> 
> --mkb
> 
> 
>> 
>> It's become commonplace, but this sort of careless argument has to be seen
>> as more a syndrome than a symptom when coming from someone like Nader. Why
>> do "progressives" feel like they have to jump at the chance to support
>> their arguments with evidence from someone like Petraeus? Does the case for
>> Palestinian rights depend on its utility in providing for a safer
>> environment for American occupiers in Iraq and Aghanistan?
>> 
>> Again, this will be explored in a longer format.
>> 
>> DG ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>  *From:* Morton K. Brussel <brussel at illinois.edu 
>> <mailto:brussel at illinois.edu>> *To:* C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu
>>  <mailto:galliher at illinois.edu>> *Cc:* Peace-discuss List
>> <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net 
>> <mailto:peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>> *Sent:* Wed, March 24, 2010
>> 12:10:54 PM *Subject:* Re: [Peace-discuss] Israel and Aid…
>> 
>> I think your questions are all irrelevant to what Nader hopes to bring to
>> the attention of the populace. He tries to show that Israel is undeserving
>> of support from the USA.  Nader is not the radical you would want him to
>> be, but his heart is in the right place, and his ideas are worth
>> considering. Aside from this, he is appalled at what Israel policy has
>> wreaked in the Middle East. You are prone to ignore all that.
>> 
>> --mkb
>> 
>> On Mar 24, 2010, at 12:21 AM, C. G. Estabrook wrote:
>> 
>>> The questions are,
>>> 
>>> [1] Is Israel diverting US policy makers from pursuing the national
>> interest?
>>> 
>>> [2] Is the national interest as understood by US policy makers
>> something to be pursued?
>>> 
>>> [3] Is the national interest so understood in fact in the interest of
>> most Americans?
>>> 
>>> The answer to all three is, "No."
>>> 
>>> 
>>> === On Tue Mar 23 2010 Brussel Morton K. <mkbrussel at comcast.net
>> <http://comcast.net/>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Useful remarks to try to change the atmosphere… Nader clearly doesn't
>> believe that the U.S. head wagging the Israeli tail.
>>> 
>>> Published on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 by CommonDreams.org
>> <http://commondreams.org/>
>>> Israel & Aid by Ralph Nader [...]
>>> 
>>> --


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.