RSS
View them here at the annual American Israel Political Action Committee wingding.
Kasich is on right now.
Update: Trump just started at 6:30 EDT.
Will Trump garner Strange New Respect?
This is the apparently the first scripted speech Trump has given in 9 months of campaigning, which ought to tell you something about how powerful AIPAC is.
At AIPAC earlier today, Hillary denounced Trump for not being wholly in Israel’s pocket. From the NYT:
Hillary Clinton pledged on Monday that she would stand unyieldingly with Israel and warned that her potential Republican rival, Donald J. Trump, would be an unreliable partner for one of America’s closest allies.
In a rock-ribbed speech in Washington that previewed how she might confront Mr. Trump on foreign policy in a general-election campaign, Mrs. Clinton said, “We need steady hands, not a president who says he’s neutral on Monday, pro-Israel on Tuesday, and who-knows-what on Wednesday.”
“America can’t ever be neutral when it comes to Israel’s security and survival,” Mrs. Clinton said, speaking to the annual policy meeting of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or Aipac, the nation’s most influential pro-Israel lobbying group. “My friends, Israel’s security is nonnegotiable.”
Mr. Trump has said in recent weeks that he would be “neutral” when it came to negotiating a peace accord between Israelis and Palestinians. The remark, in substance, did not stray far from traditional American policy. But his blunt language rattled some Israelis, who worry that it might mean a less supportive United States.
Mrs. Clinton wasted no time in seizing on those fears. Her speech was a thunderous affirmation of American solidarity with Israel, with promises to buttress Israel’s military, combat anti-Semitism, police Iran on its nuclear program, crack down on Iranian proxies like Hezbollah, and thwart efforts to boycott Israeli products.
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Reaction to what Trump said in his Washington presser – the headline at Israel Hayom (Sheldon Adelson’s paper): “Trump promises to move US embassy to Jerusalem”. Man, they do like him.
I watched Kasich for about sixty seconds — as much as I could take — and every word out of his mouth was patently phony. He’s nothing but a trained parrot.
Kasich—same ole, same ole Ode to Israel.
Trump? I really don’t know what to expect.
Haha, they switched it now.
Does every politician have to speak at AIPAC, what would happen if they refused ?
so no diff to Trump and Sanders but life or death to a standard pol
Obama shows up at AIPAC in election years, but tends to skip the ordeal during off years.
No need to go live stream. It’s all over the cable news networks. Because, you know, there is nothing more important to our presidential election than Israel.
Trump is about to materialize. He supposedly huddled today with people who can help him say all the right things and properly kowtow. Let’s hope he doesn’t talk about the Jewish guy in his building who makes great bagels…or how his accountant is a Jew…etc. (the way he did at the last Israeli-kiss-ass event he attended).
Trump talking now. Speaking very practically about Iran’s regional ambitions, which are Israel’s biggest concern. I’m impressed.
Live on MSNBC now, but I’m not sure if they broadcasted the non-Trump speeches live.
Now Cruz is launching into his worship.
No other foreign country gets this kind of nationally-televised blow job from our candidates. The parties might as well hold a primary in Israel itself.Replies: @anon
Watched a few minutes of Mr Trump’s talk. Extremely depressing.
The second half of Trump’s speech isn’t as interesting, but he totally owned the crowd with the UN-bashing!
Did Trump suddenly decide he’s running for Israeli PM?
Trump is using a teleprompter for the first time I’ve seen him do it…because, you know, if you say the wrong thing to AIPAC, you’re ruined.
…and it’s done. Got a bit repetitive at the end there. One thing I found somewhat interesting was the bit about wanting to find a solution to the Palestinian division between Hamas and Fatah, which nobody else has really talked about.
Also, interesting choice to end the speech with a mention of Ivanka’s baby rather than the moving of the embassy. That felt a bit out of order, but I guess it worked.
Whoops. #12 is from me.
Trump reminded me of the time Bugs Bunny tossed the conductor out, snapped the baton in two, and totally took over and dominated the orchestra.
I watched Kasich pay his tribute on MSNBC.
Now Cruz is launching into his worship.
No other foreign country gets this kind of nationally-televised blow job from our candidates. The parties might as well hold a primary in Israel itself.
if they'll publicly grovel that much for AIPAC donor money they'll be doing the same for every lobby with lots of cash
I don’t know who is advising Trump on Israel, but the mention of the name “Palestine” was obviously NOT an error. It was a signal.
Speaking of Cruz–gawd, I know he has a retentive, sharp mind, but he’s so damned unctuous in his deliveries. College award winning debaters should at least APPEAR to be less mechanical in every gesture, every pause.
Interesting pivot by Trump to unite the Republican party behind him. Earlier today he said if you unite behind me we can pick 5 conservative Supreme Court justices over the next few years (which he is going to name now), and if you don’t unite, or if you go third party, we are going to lose the election and lose the chance to remake the Supreme Court.
Hillary will support Israel to the ends of the earth. See this story from The New Observer
http://newobserveronline.com/clinton-destroy-syria-israel/
A newly-released Hilary Clinton email confirmed that the Obama administration has deliberately provoked the civil war in Syria as the “best way to help Israel.”
When’s the AAPAC (American Australia Political Action Committee) wingding scheduled?
I can’t wait to hear what all your presidential hopefuls are offering us. I want a free mobile phone plan with unlimited data, annexation of New Zealand and the complete annihilation of China.
Sanders, ironically, refused.
Speaking of Cruz--gawd, I know he has a retentive, sharp mind, but he's so damned unctuous in his deliveries. College award winning debaters should at least APPEAR to be less mechanical in every gesture, every pause.Replies: @IHTG, @Harry Baldwin, @Stephen R. Diamond
That’s the kind of thing that would have annoyed Israelis in the 1990s. Today, most people don’t even notice.
No irony here. He’s part of the tribe so they take his allegiance to Israel for granted.
A good friend on site has been emailing me updates. He says the crowd liked Trump and there was no sign of the walkout some people tried to engineer.
I've got mixed feelings. On the one hand, I wanted someone who would be independent of the lobby. On the other hand, now that he's proved he's not dangerous, maybe they'll let him win?
Yeah, they panned across the room a few times and he seemed to be genuinely popular.
I’ve got mixed feelings. On the one hand, I wanted someone who would be independent of the lobby. On the other hand, now that he’s proved he’s not dangerous, maybe they’ll let him win?
I’m not so sure. He might be the only one with a free hand to make demands on them.
Interesting: no screaming protesters inside the AIPAC hall.
I was half expecting half the crowd to walk out and him to say, "See? At least the protesters here are civilized."
I don’t know what to think. Earlier in the day he talked about non-interventionism, reducing aid to Israel and reducing NATO.
Then he makes this pandering speech.
I don’t care how much he swears he loves Israel as long as we don’t get dragged into another war.
Purely from a political skill perspective that was an impressive performance.
Trump is saying the US should leave NATO and S Korea. So who knows what he will actually do? 538 says Trump will end up just short of delegates needed.
I can't wait to hear what all your presidential hopefuls are offering us. I want a free mobile phone plan with unlimited data, annexation of New Zealand and the complete annihilation of China.Replies: @Another Canadian, @iSteveFan
Well, instead you will likely get the complete annihilation of New Zealand, annexation of New Guinea and a Chinese mobile phone plan. Cheers!
Israel is civert White identity politics shortand for “We don’t take bs from Muslims” That s all.
Hillary! praised Suha Arafats speech in which Hillary! sat adoringly wherin Suha advocated global extermination of Jews as a moral duty for all Revolutionaries.
No doubt Trump recalls this.
I can't wait to hear what all your presidential hopefuls are offering us. I want a free mobile phone plan with unlimited data, annexation of New Zealand and the complete annihilation of China.Replies: @Another Canadian, @iSteveFan
Pat, I hear the presidential hopefuls are promising to give Australia her new Super Hornets and Growlers free of charge in return for Australia being such a great ally who actually went to war with us in the war on terror.
Yes, it’s a joke. But if any ally deserves free toys from Uncle Sam, it is Australia.
I wonder if Glen Beck and the other mega-church types supporting Cruz called their “dear friends” at AIPAC asking, pretty-please, if they could give Trump a cold reception, and were told zip it?
Speaking of Cruz--gawd, I know he has a retentive, sharp mind, but he's so damned unctuous in his deliveries. College award winning debaters should at least APPEAR to be less mechanical in every gesture, every pause.Replies: @IHTG, @Harry Baldwin, @Stephen R. Diamond
George “The Scold” Will and Charles “The Sage” Krauthammer thought the use of the word “Palestine” was a yuuge error.
Not attending is far better than Trump’s pandering.
Then he makes this pandering speech.
I don't care how much he swears he loves Israel as long as we don't get dragged into another war.
Purely from a political skill perspective that was an impressive performance.Replies: @Stephen R. Diamond
What’s he pandering for? Zionist money for the general election? (He still won’t say whether he will self-finance in the general, like Sanders.)
He's either genuinely pro-Israel and/or he believes the media is run by Zionists and wants to get on their good side for the general. The media claims he's pandering to evangelicals.
Also I don't think he's entirely self-funded in the general; the party kicks in a lot of money at that level
So much for the common prediction that Trump would “troll” AIPAC.
Weed out the mispredictors!
Speaking of Cruz--gawd, I know he has a retentive, sharp mind, but he's so damned unctuous in his deliveries. College award winning debaters should at least APPEAR to be less mechanical in every gesture, every pause.Replies: @IHTG, @Harry Baldwin, @Stephen R. Diamond
He’s also verbose. The long wind-up (reminds me of Clinton’s) grates.
He sounds like a preacher. Did he talk like this before the Supreme Court (or in college debates)? If, on the other hand, it’s a crafted persona, why is it so awful?
Weed out the mispredictors!Replies: @SFG
Weed out? People are allowed to be *wrong*, you know.
They were going to walk out on him, as I recall.
I was half expecting half the crowd to walk out and him to say, “See? At least the protesters here are civilized.”
The jokes on us cause we got to buy the useless F-35 which cost $1 trillion to produce (more than our GDP).
I hear Trump isn’t much impressed with the F-35 either. Hopefully as a gift to us he does what you suggest, as well as take back the F-35s free of charge.
Sanders isn’t self funding is he?
Yes, this speech was a disappointment. He does have a lot in common with Rand Paul, foreign policy wise. Rand’s been pretty pro Israel but still maintained his pragmatic/anti interventionist bent.
This speech and the statement about picking SCOTUS appointments by consulting with Heritage may go a ways in bringing some of the GOPe guys around to supporting him.
After watching Obama humiliate himself today I’m thinking that Trump has an interesting task cut out for himself. He’s clearly never been an interventionist. But he has a visceral loathing for Obama style self-abasement. So the challenge is non-interventionism without losing your dignity, insulting your allies or your position of strength. My sense of today’s various statements is that that is the balance he is trying to strike.
Either that or he’s just crazy. We’ll never know.
Hopefully this speech will get some of the neoconservatives off his back. You can see from their Twitter feeds that they liked his speech.
“I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen”.
“Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy to be useful must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.”
As huge an error as the late Secretary of State’s (Hillary Rodham Clinton) publicly referring to Jerusalem as the capitol of Israel?
I was fine with Trump’s speech. He did himself some good. What do you guys want, for him to make himself completely unelectable?
AIPAC made it clear to potential protesters that they would be banned from future conferences if they were disrespectful. I’m too lazy to post the link, but it’s true. Some attendees were trying to organize a walkout but an AIPAC guy put the kibosh on the idea. An email was sent instructing attendees that if they didn’t agree with a speaker they should not go to the speech.
Sort of on-topic; the Sydney Murdoch paper in Oz has been hammering the Trump campaign relentlessly with every one of its neocon shills writing weekly columns of 2-minute hate, all of which culminated in a Grand Denunciation: US election: President Donald Trump would be a ‘disaster’ for Australia, analysts warn.
The article included a poll:
Are you worried about Trump becoming US President?
YES (May God have mercy on us all)
NO (Donald Trump is da man!)
That poll led to a shocked follow up article:
Aussies come out in support of Donald Trump in Daily Telegraph online poll
An online poll on The Daily Telegraph showed a surprising 71 per cent of respondents answered ‘No (Donald Trump is da man!)’ when asked ‘Are you worried about Trump becoming US President?’
There were more than 32,000 votes cast in the poll.
Perhaps if Murdoch’s papers actually got to know their readers they wouldn’t find it so “surprising” when their polls go the other way they were advocating. One gets the impression that if Trump were to declare annexation of Oz as part of his election platform that would go down a treat here in Oz.
Link to the text of the speech here:
http://www.donaldjtrump.com/media/donald-j-trump-remarks-at-aipac
Just as I predicted more than a week ago, he got to the right of Hillary on Israel in a large number of ways, including moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem.
He also subtly endorsed the settlements in the West Bank.
There you go, the Israeli’s 2000 offer to leave some of the West Bank settlements, keeping East Jerusalem and roughly the best 14% of the West Bank, giving the Pali’s the 86% of the West Bank plus 100% of Gaza, was “maybe even too generous.”
Hillary just can’t go there and has ever endorsed the West Bank settlements. For Trump, even giving up some of the West Bank settlements is “maybe even too generous.” He’s right!
I love it. “No daylight” is a pro-Israel dog whistle. Keep tooting it Don!
Could I look in your eyes?Do you think of me
Like I dream of you?Do you wish you were here
Like I wish I was with you?You’ve loved me before
Do you love me now?Does love ever end
When two hearts have torn away?
Or does it go on
And beat strong anyway?
You’ve loved me before
Do you love me now?Come back to me right now!
C’mon c’mon come back to me right now!C’mon c’mon come back to me right now!
C’mon c’mon come on!You’ve loved me before
Do you love me now?You’ve loved me before
Do you love me now?
http://www.donaldjtrump.com/media/donald-j-trump-remarks-at-aipac
Just as I predicted more than a week ago, he got to the right of Hillary on Israel in a large number of ways, including moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem.
He also subtly endorsed the settlements in the West Bank.There you go, the Israeli's 2000 offer to leave some of the West Bank settlements, keeping East Jerusalem and roughly the best 14% of the West Bank, giving the Pali's the 86% of the West Bank plus 100% of Gaza, was "maybe even too generous."
Hillary just can't go there and has ever endorsed the West Bank settlements. For Trump, even giving up some of the West Bank settlements is "maybe even too generous." He's right!I love it. "No daylight" is a pro-Israel dog whistle. Keep tooting it Don!Replies: @SFG, @Pat Hannagan
I just hope he keeps some of that non-interventionism. I am really, really sick of getting into wars on Israel’s behalf. At least we didn’t get *too* involved in Syria.
That was genius. There was no way for Cruz to top it.
This is very frustrating.
The Clinton/Bush/Obama foreign policy has been an unmitigated catastrophe.
The strategy?
Aggressive economic, proxy, air, and/or ground war for regime change in Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Yugoslavia, and various ex-Soviet republics.
The cost?
Thousands of dead and maimed Americans, hundreds of thousands of dead Middle Easterners and S.E. Europeans, and tens of trillions of dollars wasted.
The results?
Ruined nations, the strengthening of our enemy Al-Qaeda, the rise of ISIS, the ethnic cleansing of Middle Eastern Christians and other religious minorities, and the migrant invasion of Europe.
Before today, there seemed to be good reason to hope that President Trump’s foreign policy would be a significant improvement over that of his predecessors.
But if we wage war against Iran, Syria and their allies at the behest of AIPAC, as Trump now seems to want, what will be the likely results?
Death, destruction, waste, the strengthening of radical Sunni jihadists such as Al-Qaeda and ISIS, the ethnic cleansing of the remaining Middle Eastern Christians, and a pretext for another wave of migrant invasion into Europe. In other words, a continuation of the Clinton/Bush/Obama foreign policy.
There doesn’t seem to be much choice but to support Trump anyway. Cruz is worse than Trump. Clinton and Kasich are much worse than even Cruz.
The fact remains, those who convinced Trump to change the thrust of his foreign policy have blood on their hands. They may have cost him the general election by weakening one of his most powerful arguments against Clinton – her dismal foreign policy record as First Lady, Senator and Secretary of State.
Ironically, Israel is supremely secure even without any assistance from America. They have the only first-rate conventional military in the Middle East. They have the only nuclear arsenal in the Middle East. They have the world’s best border fence. They have a firmly nationalist government and culture, a replacement level birthrate among their core ethnic group, an immigration policy designed to augment their core ethnic group, and a tax base sufficient to maintain all this.
There’s a lot of bloat in defense, but I’m not sure eliminating a next-generation air superiority fighter is the best move. Maybe buy fewer of them, or find a cheaper way to procure them, but it’s a good deterrent to have command of the skies.
http://newobserveronline.com/clinton-destroy-syria-israel/
A newly-released Hilary Clinton email confirmed that the Obama administration has deliberately provoked the civil war in Syria as the “best way to help Israel.”Replies: @Reg Cæsar
Anything that sends Hillary to the other end of the earth is all right by me. As long as she stays.
It would be ironic of the F35 really is as big of a dog as is claimed; the Israeli’s sold the technology to the Chinese, and they get stuck with another lame aircraft.
I suddenly feel a strange, new respect for Bernie….
I read somewhere that if Kasich drops out the delegates from Ohio become bound to the 2nd place finisher, who is Trump. I haven’t run this to ground but that adds a possible path forward and doesn’t require Kasich to forthrightly support Trump.
The centers of power in America are what they are and Trump has to confront them and pick his battles, he can’t fight on every front and expect to win. It took us a long time to become a puppet of Israel and it’ll take a long time to diminish that influence.
“538” has been wrong about Trump all along, so take his predictions for what they’re worth.
What’s he pandering for? Zionist money for the general election?
He’s either genuinely pro-Israel and/or he believes the media is run by Zionists and wants to get on their good side for the general. The media claims he’s pandering to evangelicals.
Also I don’t think he’s entirely self-funded in the general; the party kicks in a lot of money at that level
Mossad takes ’em out
How was the state of Chinese cuisine in Sydney, Vancouver, and London in 1956 vs. today?
I thought that Trump was the one Republican frontrunner who would not tear up the Iran deal if elected. Tonight he said that it was the worst thing ever and everyone clapped. When he said that he had studied it, everyone laughed.
I don’t what to say about Trump now. I literally fell asleep while I was watching his speech. As a cookie-cutter teleprompter-reading pol, he is a… loser!
He needs to find a middle ground between making fun of handicapped people and imitating an establishment candidate.
If you want to talk about who whom and divergence of interests, what about the large divergence of interests between Altright/WN males and females.
Dave, the F-35 is not the next gen air superiority fighter. That title belongs to the F-22 which replaced the F-15 in the air superiority role. The F-35 is designed to replace the F-16 and A-10 in the USAF in the ground attack and close air support mission, the F-18A-D in the USN and USMC in the strike mission, and the AV-8 in the USMC in their VSTOL role. Because of this it was doomed from the start. If we find ourselves in need of more air superiority fighters, we either need to reopen the F-22 assembly line or maybe purchase the proposed F-15 silent Eagle upgrade to the venerable F-15 Eagle. But the F-35 doesn’t fill the air superiority role.
F-35 sucks donkey balls, has only 1 engine, and is too slow at Mach 1.6, why not just build more F-22s and incorporate the ability to attack ground targets?
Why did Trump speak at AIPAC? Trump does not pander. But he knows everyone will be watching what HE said at AIPAC. And they are. If he used the word “Palestinian”, everyone will talk about his “mistake” and talk about him. If he said he read the Iran deal, they may laugh, but it gets reported. He gets reported. If he is boring, they will say he showed maturity. That is why Trump spoke at AIPAC. I doubt Trump cares too much about the Middle East (which is a good thing). But this guy keeps getting free press, more free press, more attention and after he does, everyone says: why did he do that? What was the purpose? Every time.
While the plane itself will in all likelihood be terrible, it has some absolutely fantastic technology in it(which will go a long way to masking the terrible design decisions), that isn’t a win.
The F-35 is also sexist.
We should recognise now the bravery of our prospective female F-35 pilots. At an 80%-odd guaranteed death rate, they are up there with the kamikaze pilots of World War 2. Those who we can recover from the Northern Territory scrub will have a high proportion of neck injuries, including quadriplegia. Perhaps the prospect of permanent incapacity, and being confined to an institution for the rest of their lives, makes them just as brave as the pilots of Japan’s divine wind. Talk about closing the gap!
They did give the F-22 the ability to drop bombs. But it is too expensive. I think its cost was near $200 million per copy. That’s why they shut down the line after 180 were built.
The F-35 could have had a chance if they would have just built it to USAF specs. But the USMC wanted in and demanded a plane that could take off and land like the Harrier. Even though there are 3 variants, F-35A for the USAF, F-35B for the USMC and F-35C for the USN, the designers had to make sure they could satisfy the USMC requirement first. So I think this took a lot away from the other variants. Given that the USAF wanted 1700 planes, way more than everyone else, they should have built the thing first to fulfill the USAF mission and then tried to adapt it to the other services later. Now it appears that it won’t do anything spectacularly well.
Andrew Davies, senior analyst with the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, reckons the only problem with the F-35 is that it was "bedevilled by a "conspiracy of optimism" in its early phase".
"Clearly the Australian government signed up to something at the time which was far less mature than they judged it to be," he said.
This forced Australia to buy 24 Super Hornet jets as a stop-gap. Dr Davies said the government should ready itself to do the same again, "rather than get caught flat-footed, should something push the F-35 acquisition further into the future".
Countering this argument the group Air Power Australia, which was set up more than a decade ago essentially to advocate against the JSF, branded the fighters the "jackass of all trades and masterful of none".
I wasn’t being entirely serious. That said, I can think of more than one example of a nation in a hurry to appropriate foreign technology only to find that it wasn’t as good as expected.
I like the intercutting of the totally unrelated debates here — Trump and AIPAC being one, the F-35 pro or con being the other.
Let’s have more of this sort of thing.
HA, this is like an annual reminder that israel got the entire american govt by the balls.
and trump will be no different, another bootlicker.
So why doesn't Putin/Saudis/Iran/China etc just bribe them more?
It would be a lot easier.
Very odd.
Makes me think a lot of them are blackmailed as well.Replies: @Astuteobservor II
http://www.donaldjtrump.com/media/donald-j-trump-remarks-at-aipac
Just as I predicted more than a week ago, he got to the right of Hillary on Israel in a large number of ways, including moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem.
He also subtly endorsed the settlements in the West Bank.There you go, the Israeli's 2000 offer to leave some of the West Bank settlements, keeping East Jerusalem and roughly the best 14% of the West Bank, giving the Pali's the 86% of the West Bank plus 100% of Gaza, was "maybe even too generous."
Hillary just can't go there and has ever endorsed the West Bank settlements. For Trump, even giving up some of the West Bank settlements is "maybe even too generous." He's right!I love it. "No daylight" is a pro-Israel dog whistle. Keep tooting it Don!Replies: @SFG, @Pat Hannagan
I vote this as 2016 AIPAC theme song:
“Do You Love Me Now?”
If I saw you now
Could I look in your eyes?
Do you think of me
Like I dream of you?
Do you wish you were here
Like I wish I was with you?
You’ve loved me before
Do you love me now?
Does love ever end
When two hearts have torn away?
Or does it go on
And beat strong anyway?
You’ve loved me before
Do you love me now?
Come back to me right now!
C’mon c’mon come back to me right now!
C’mon c’mon come back to me right now!
C’mon c’mon come on!
You’ve loved me before
Do you love me now?
You’ve loved me before
Do you love me now?
Right, and he needed to demonstrate that he is capable of giving a normal, diplomatic political speech calibrated to his audience, as any leader must do.
I know it is a controversial topic in these parts, but the majority of Americans are favorably disposed toward Israel.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/181652/seven-americans-continue-view-israel-favorably.aspx
Thus, AIPAC was a reasonable place for Trump to show that he is not as far outside the mainstream as the media et al. are claiming.
This speech may have been the start of an effort to look more statesmanlike. Perhaps there would have been a better venue if the need had arisen at a different time, but Trump needed to do this now, and AIPAC was a high-profile opportunity at the right moment.
Good point. But skeptics would say that's largely because Israel gets constant praise & very little criticism in mainstream U.S. politics & media. Just last night Americans saw all their favorite candidates praising Israel effusively & unconditionally & it was covered on cable news. With that kind of publicity, I'm surprised they don't have a 90% approval rating.
The Royal Navy are having two aircraft carriers built one of which will be immediately mothballed when the second is completed and neither of which were designed to hold the largest of the F-35 variant which has been ordered for them.
Trump is a friend to Israel. Surely even the most Jew obsessed David Duke weirdo already knew that. He obviously does not believe in Nazism or elders of zion or KMac type theories. How anyone could convince themselves otherwise, I will never understand.
Yet it is also clearly true that Trump is the only candidate who will prioritise the interests of the American people. And it is that fact that should mean that all Americans, from David Duke to Louis Farrakhan to Bill Clinton himself should support him.
Now prioritising Americans does not preclude giving a nice, tidy speech to Israel to make them happy, feel loved and show that America will not let them all be murdered in their beds…
I couldn’t vote for any candidate who pandered to AIPAC. So the only worthwhile candidate is Sanders.
The teleprompter says a lot.
Supposedly Obama is the most anti Israel President ever, but he has done absolutely nothing to stop settlements or restart the peace process.
The Clinton/Bush/Obama foreign policy has been an unmitigated catastrophe.
The strategy?
Aggressive economic, proxy, air, and/or ground war for regime change in Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Yugoslavia, and various ex-Soviet republics.
The cost?
Thousands of dead and maimed Americans, hundreds of thousands of dead Middle Easterners and S.E. Europeans, and tens of trillions of dollars wasted.
The results?
Ruined nations, the strengthening of our enemy Al-Qaeda, the rise of ISIS, the ethnic cleansing of Middle Eastern Christians and other religious minorities, and the migrant invasion of Europe.
Before today, there seemed to be good reason to hope that President Trump's foreign policy would be a significant improvement over that of his predecessors.
But if we wage war against Iran, Syria and their allies at the behest of AIPAC, as Trump now seems to want, what will be the likely results?
Death, destruction, waste, the strengthening of radical Sunni jihadists such as Al-Qaeda and ISIS, the ethnic cleansing of the remaining Middle Eastern Christians, and a pretext for another wave of migrant invasion into Europe. In other words, a continuation of the Clinton/Bush/Obama foreign policy.
There doesn't seem to be much choice but to support Trump anyway. Cruz is worse than Trump. Clinton and Kasich are much worse than even Cruz.
The fact remains, those who convinced Trump to change the thrust of his foreign policy have blood on their hands. They may have cost him the general election by weakening one of his most powerful arguments against Clinton - her dismal foreign policy record as First Lady, Senator and Secretary of State.
Ironically, Israel is supremely secure even without any assistance from America. They have the only first-rate conventional military in the Middle East. They have the only nuclear arsenal in the Middle East. They have the world's best border fence. They have a firmly nationalist government and culture, a replacement level birthrate among their core ethnic group, an immigration policy designed to augment their core ethnic group, and a tax base sufficient to maintain all this.Replies: @Anonymous Nephew
The only thing the BBC reported was that he’d scrap Obama’s Iran deal. I hope he’s not turning into McCain 2.
negative media and no funding
so no diff to Trump and Sanders but life or death to a standard pol
Now Cruz is launching into his worship.
No other foreign country gets this kind of nationally-televised blow job from our candidates. The parties might as well hold a primary in Israel itself.Replies: @anon
if it wasn’t already obvious in other ways it shows how totally corrupted US politics has become
if they’ll publicly grovel that much for AIPAC donor money they’ll be doing the same for every lobby with lots of cash
lolz, well done them
Silver is too #triggeredby trump to think straight – best ignored..
The weird thing it is out in plain sight that US politicians have been entirely corrupted by various lobbies due to the extreme cost of elections.
So why doesn’t Putin/Saudis/Iran/China etc just bribe them more?
It would be a lot easier.
Very odd.
Makes me think a lot of them are blackmailed as well.
TreasonFest.
Yet it is also clearly true that Trump is the only candidate who will prioritise the interests of the American people. And it is that fact that should mean that all Americans, from David Duke to Louis Farrakhan to Bill Clinton himself should support him.
Now prioritising Americans does not preclude giving a nice, tidy speech to Israel to make them happy, feel loved and show that America will not let them all be murdered in their beds...Replies: @Reg Cæsar
But Bill wants his old bedroom back. Maybe Donald could offer him a better one?
Our wars “on Israel’s behalf” don’t actually look like they’ve improved israel’s security much. Perhaps our foreign policy geniuses are no better at seeking Israel’s interests than our own.
Rhetoric != reality. Obama has consistently been a centrist on foreign policy.
but the majority of Americans are favorably disposed toward Israel.
Good point. But skeptics would say that’s largely because Israel gets constant praise & very little criticism in mainstream U.S. politics & media. Just last night Americans saw all their favorite candidates praising Israel effusively & unconditionally & it was covered on cable news. With that kind of publicity, I’m surprised they don’t have a 90% approval rating.
The neocon sabre rattling is all about Iran, which is not a real threat to Israel except indirectly through support of the Arabs in the West bank. It is very important to realise that Israeli politicians and the Lobby that take their cure from them, don’t dare mention what they see as the greatest threat. Supposedly Obama is the most anti Israel President ever, but that he has done absolutely nothing to stop settlements or restart the peace process does not mean he is doing anything good for Israel.
The official US policy supported by both recent Republican and Democrat presidents is for a process toward a new Palestinian state, which Israel and its Lobby have put into suspended animation. There isn’t enough unsettled land left for a meaningful new Palestinian state anyway. The West Bank Arabs will have to be given second class citizenship in what will be internationally recognisable as an obviously Apartheid regime, or full rights (either would mean the end of Israel as a Jewish state within a generation).
The alternative, quietly longed for by many Israelis, is West Bank Arabs to fight against Israel and be relocated to the existing Palestinian state of Jordan during a wider war between ISIS and Israel. The counter-jumping chickenhawks of the Israel Lobby don’t dare suggest the aforementioned removal of Arabs, which happens to be the only thing that can keep Israel a Jewish country. Clinton would not let things (ISIS or similar organisation taking over Jordan and fighting against Israel) get that far, and she would not let Israel transfer the West Bank Arabs in any case. Trump is a very different kettle of fish.
The F-22 plans were probably torn up to prevent anyone from copying it, its also turning out that it might be a “too costly to lose” type aircraft.
Coincidentally, the Australian Parliament is currently holding a Senate hearing into the Joint Strike Fighter.
Andrew Davies, senior analyst with the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, reckons the only problem with the F-35 is that it was “bedevilled by a “conspiracy of optimism” in its early phase”.
“Clearly the Australian government signed up to something at the time which was far less mature than they judged it to be,” he said.
This forced Australia to buy 24 Super Hornet jets as a stop-gap. Dr Davies said the government should ready itself to do the same again, “rather than get caught flat-footed, should something push the F-35 acquisition further into the future”.
Countering this argument the group Air Power Australia, which was set up more than a decade ago essentially to advocate against the JSF, branded the fighters the “jackass of all trades and masterful of none”.
The most important question facing Americans in this Presidential race to who can best represent “our strategic ally, our unbreakable friendship, and our cultural brother, the only democracy in the Middle East ® the state of Israel”: Can Israel trust Donald Trump?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXRZJgkPDSQ&feature=youtu.be
71% say Yes, 29% say No
Over to you Steveosphere, can the Jewish state of Israel trust Donald Trump?…
Oliver Twist face: Please, sir, can we have some too? Maybe a deal on some surplus stuff.
Aussies are quietly taking care of themselves.
http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton-foundation-donors-got-weapons-deals-hillary-clintons-state-department-1934187
They’re tied with the Saudis and the Norwegians in the amounts of money donated to the Clinton Foundation while Hillary was Secretary of State and in charge of approving weapon sales. Australian weapon shopping rose by 198% to 23 billion dollars in 2010-2012, compared with 2006-2008, while arms sales in general were only up by about 80%.
I’m a bit displeased with the deal my country made to buy third hand F-16s from the Portuguese (first used by Americans) with minimal upgrades. For the same amount, we could have bought new Swedish Gripens. Maybe greasing some palms in Foggy Bottom (Hillary’s) or paying for a few speeches from Chelsea would have gotten us some better kit, maybe second hand from the National Guard, or a better deal at least on the armaments. Then again, I’m assuming our decision makers were preemptively bribed themselves to accept such a bad offer. And each side bribing the other is a bit like crossing the streams in Ghostbusters.
Brunei, Jamaica and especially Ireland got a bum deal though. Spent more to get way less. Ireland *donated* half our 10 million yet their arms imports decreased by 26% while ours increased by 198%. Is Hillary an anti-Irishite?Replies: @Romanian
Thanks for that, Romanian. Good to see someone’s on the ball and shoveling money down the right pockets.
Brunei, Jamaica and especially Ireland got a bum deal though. Spent more to get way less. Ireland *donated* half our 10 million yet their arms imports decreased by 26% while ours increased by 198%. Is Hillary an anti-Irishite?
Don’t kid yourself. Sanders can’t afford to alienate his crazy SWPL/BLM base by supporting Israel at AIPAC in the middle of the campaign.
So why doesn't Putin/Saudis/Iran/China etc just bribe them more?
It would be a lot easier.
Very odd.
Makes me think a lot of them are blackmailed as well.Replies: @Astuteobservor II
nah, some maybe, not alot. the only way to blackmail a politician is with something extreme. most are bought or just don’t want to make an enemy of aipac who can throw few hundred millions against you in an election. it is why that supreme court decision on super-pac was so important. when scalia died, I was like why didn’t he died sooner.
saudis are just puppets. doing the thankless jobs in the ME for usa, it is why everything bad done by saudis are swept under the rug. the other 3 are clear rivals of usa in geopolitics. israel and the jews are wrongly view as victims(they have milked something that commonly occurs during wars for 60 years now) of WW2 and current american ally(complete bs), it is why they can lobby/bribe/intimidate/whatever else with impunity.
True but only if Kasich formally drops out. He won’t. He would suspend his campaign, just like Rubio did. A seemingly semantic but legally very important difference. Trump’s not getting the Ohio delegates.
Brunei, Jamaica and especially Ireland got a bum deal though. Spent more to get way less. Ireland *donated* half our 10 million yet their arms imports decreased by 26% while ours increased by 198%. Is Hillary an anti-Irishite?Replies: @Romanian
Well, the Secretary of State does a lot more than approve arms sales. It’s just that the IBT investigation concerned itself with that particular correlation. It does not imply causation. Ireland shopped for what it needed and could afford and stopped where its budget ended I assume. I can imagine that there are US allies to whom sales are no problem whatsoever, not just because they’re the good, virtuous sort, but also because they lack the economic sectors to reverse engineer, steal tech etc. Australia is widely admired among the commentariat of a Romanian military blog I frequent, especially for its insistence on a healthy offset and local contribution to its future subs. In addition to being a civilized and successful country.
But there are other things one’s donation money could presumably buy. In the case of Ireland, protection from populist punitive measure aimed at the money companies like Apple and Google don’t sent back home and keep with their Irish subsidiaries, or their use of the double Irish arrangement to lower tax liabilities. I’m just theorizing here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_Irish_arrangement
For Jamaica, I can theorize that it was about avoiding IRS inquiries into the money of US citizens held in its banks. Jamaica has supposedly been tiptoeing towards fiscal paradise status. A quick Google showed that in 2013, just after Clinton was replaced, the IRS started to probe US taxpayer records with offshore banks accounts in the Caribbean. Maybe I’m begging the question by formulating the hypothesis then specifically searching it out on Google.
http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/latestnews/IRS-to-probe-US-taxpayer-records-with-Caribbean-Offshore-Bank-accounts
Or maybe it was just hedging its bets during a period of ever closer ties with China, whose forays into the Caribbean could be construed as a challenge to the US.
And Brunei simply has a lot of money from oil and a good reason to spend some of it around liberally, to obtain some support and some peace of mind. Resource wealth breeds paranoia.
And, in general, I can imagine such donations, and the odd 600 thousand dollar half hour speech, as being a sort of insurance for being looked upon favorably in general, not necessarily for a predefined transactional interest. I’ve heard of companies operating in places like Central Asia which get the hint that a voluntary donation of a fully equipped lab to a University or the President’s Strategic Studies Institute would gain them some political capital, without it ever reaching the point of X dollar bribe for contract Y. In some cases, the donation gets them nothing in return.
An illustration
I think I know australians fairly well, and there’s no way in hell they aren’t going to like Trump. If anyone’s a “Crocodile Dundee” of the American Political Process, it’s Donald.
Don’t forget to sign the petition to allow guns at the RNC Convention.
https://www.change.org/p/quicken-loans-arena-allow-open-carry-of-firearms-at-the-quicken-loans-arena-during-the-rnc-convention-in-july-2