Peretz, we all know you're a bastard - but you're a fool too. Obama's "sharp insight" comes with a bashing the Likud. Don't you know that bashing the "Likudniks" is typical anti-Semitic garbage? When they don't dare call you a Jew, they say you're a "Likudnik". Have you learned that little?

You're living proof that The Jewis people has its imbeciles. You also show clearly that age does not necessarily bring wisdom. You're old but not wise - an old fool and a bastard, that's who you are.

And here is an Haaretz article on the same topic:

"Will Obama be supportive of an Israel controlled by a Likud government?"

"U.S. presidential hopeful makes a comment that can be seen as meddling in Israel's internal politics."

By Shmuel Rosner

www.haaretz.com/.../PrintArticleEn.jhtml

"OBAMA: One last point I'll make on this, in terms of advisors and the kind of debate I think is fruitful, one of the things that struck me when I went to Israel was how much more open the debate was around these issues in Israel than they are sometimes here in the United States. "

It's exactly point made by  John J. Mearsheimer, Stephen M. Walt. Marty, go ahead, sleep calmly.

Without going into details, unfortunately there ARE Israeli Jews (and not just Israeli Arabs) for whom giving up Jewish sovereignty (or making it functionally meaningless and hence short-lived)  is truly their wet dream.  They tend to be over represented in academia (particularly in the social sciences and humanities), the arts, even among some "respectable" journalists.  And of course they tend to congregate in Tel Aviv (but not exclusively).

The common underlying denominator is that the they seek their "validation" among the European progressobabble speaking set and hence adopt their views and like any convert to the one true religion, they tend to take on the more extreme views.

As was well noted by psychiatrist & historian Kenneth Levin, self-hatred & self-negation & identifying with the enemies has long plagued the Jewish people since ancient times.

Hershel Ginsburg

Jerusalem / Efrata

"I don't at all think that I'd be disappointed with an Obama presidency"

Now there's a strong statement of support!  Anyway, my guess is that Obama will start by pressuring Israel on the settlements at the time he starts withdrawing troops from Iraq. Not that I think that would be wrong, but he'll be using it as an excuse to weaken US support of Israel rather than broker a peace deal. There are lots of ways you can appear to be a "strong supporter of Israel" and take very hostile positions -- nuance on "right of return," talk up Jersualem, double-talk on attacking innocent civilians, etc.  Anyone right of Ralph Nader can support Israel's sovereignty.    

With all due respect (and I really do respect) to Marty Peretz, I am very leery about Obama in the White House, with regard to Israel in particular and with regard to contending with Islamic terrorism in general.

Obama speaks well but vacuously.  His mantra about "engaging" rogue states like Iran & Syria is very reminiscent of Neville Chamberlain who also had the backing of the academic / arts / and journalism elite in Britain of his time.

And thank you Jacksondyer for the link to the Rosner Ha'aretz piece.  He is so right about Obama's putative meddling.  Those who engage in a knee jerk rejection of Likud & Netanyahu, should keep in mind that on the Cassandra scale of accurate warnings regarding the negative consequences of policies supported and implemented by Labor, Kadima, Meretz, Bush & Clinton, Netanyahu has been far more prescient than all of them put together.

Instead of pandering the to left wing of the democratic party (at least as regards Israel and the middle east) it would behoove Obama to think how he would work with (or "engage") a Netanyahu lead government.  Although the Likud only has 12 seats in the current Knesset, there is a reason why the polls consistently indicate that Netanyahu will be the next prime minister and that the Likud will have 30+ seats in the next Knesset.  And keep in mind that polls and pundits chronically underestimate the electoral strength of the Likud and the Center-Right wing of the Israeli populace.

I am sure Obama is a good person who means well, but he strikes me as very naive.  And the bitter lesson we have learned in Israel since the ill-conceived Oslo Accords is that naivete kills.

Hershel Ginsburg

Jerusalem / Efrata

P.S.  I am not exactly thrilled with Hillary Clinton either.  And despite Lieberman's endorsement, I am not sure about McCain.  So I am in a quandary.

Sleepy, I have to agree with you about "likudnik" being used as a slur by antisemites.

Marty's hatred for the Clinton's has overwhelmed his reason.  

Sorry folks, I'm with Marty on this one.  Obama's quote about Likud was a refreshingly accurate observation of the public dynamics of the American Jewish community on issues related to Israel (unlike the Mearshimer crowd, who can't seem to distinguish between the ZOA and the Reform Judaism RAC, as both are opposed to a re-division of Jerusalem), as well as a basic statement of fact that a Netenyahu-led Likud government had very difficult relations with the last Democtratic administration.  The US government has the right to prefer one party over another in the governance of its allies -- or did I miss the vast outrage over the current administration's obvious preference for Sarkozy over Chirac and Royal, for Merkel over Schroder, for Howard over Rudd, for Musharraf over anyone else in Pakistan (to take just a few examples)?  And there was nothing in his Cleveland address that suggested that an Obama-led administration would be any less supportive of core, stated Israeli government policies (such as the eventual handover of governmental power over 95% of the West Bank to a Palestinian administration) than anyone else.

And if someone wants to see Neville Chamberlain in his desire to negotiate with Iran or Syria as a means of neutralizing their anti-Western and anti-Israel policies, go ahead.  But at least get your history right.  Obama's rhetoric and tone, not to mention his stated willingness to use force if necessary with Iran, is nothing like the notes of the Munich Conference.

Likud has 12 members in current Knesset.  Criticizing Likud should only be marginally more distasteful to Israelis than Israeli politicians criticizing Ralph Nader or Ron Paul should be to Americans

"Likud has 12 members in current Knesset. "

Stuart,  your tunnel vision may be exceeded only by your myopia. I suggest you read the second of my two posts above.  But just to be sure, I will reiterate and expand..

True, Likud only has 12 seats in the current Knesset, a legacy of the elections two years ago.  However, nd it's a very big however, in the aftermath of the rise of Hamas, which Netanyahu predicted would be the consequence of the Sharon-Olmert unilateral evacuation from Gaza, Netanyahu and the Likud started leading in the polls (side note:  Sharon & Olmert justified their Gaza policy based on polling data as opposed to election promises and results).  And in the aftermath of the Second Lebanese War, Olmerts ratings plunged even further and Netanyahu & the Likud rose even more.  Surprise, surprise, back in 2000 Netanyahu & the Likud warned against the consequences of unilaterally pulling out of Lebanon and leaving Hezbolla intact.

Since Lebanon 2, the Likud has consistently polled in the 30+ seat range, Kadima  (currently 29 seats) has plummeted to the low teens or even single digit range.  Olmert's popularity has pretty much stayed in the single digit range, occasionally climbing to the mid-teens (one poll once gave Olmert a lower popularity than the margin of error).

Keep in mind that Israeli pollsters and pundits regularly and chronically underestimate the electoral strength of the center-right of Israel's political spectrum, and over estimate the center-left.  On top of this Olmert has benefited from a protected "Etrog" status in the Israeli media (especially Ha'aretz) and Netanyahu is despised by most of the left-wing media elites who look for any reason to take him down.  And despite all this Netanyahu & Likud have consistently led in the polls for at least 1.5 years.. So much so that what is keeping the very unpopular government afloat is the realization that many of them will lose their seats in the coming election.

So why are Netanyahu & Likud leading the polls with only 12 seats currently in the Knesset?  Remember the definition of a conservative -- a liberal who's been mugged?  Well a lot of Israelis feel they have been mugged... and fooled by the naive and delusional promises of peace.

Hershel Ginsburg

(in full horns and pointed tail regalia)

Jerusalem / Efrata

Obama acknowledged that  "There was a very honest, thoughtful debate taking place inside Israel."

The only real question is,  would President Obama respect the outcome of such debates or would he try substitute such outcome with his own judgment?  It appears to me that Obama is inclined to do so.  Why does he want  “opening up that conversation.” in US?

"Obama's ... stated willingness to use force if necessary with Iran".

Frankly, when push comes to shove I don't think he would use force but instead would come up with a creative rationalization to say he has brought peace in our time.  I can't prove it and can't point to any one thing he said, but overall, this is the impression he gives me.

Hershel G. (etc.0

With its military and industrial strength, maybe it is not such a bad thing for Israel to rid itself of its image as America's proctectorate. It comes with a steep price. The United States should not be in a position to dictate Israel's foreign or trade policy as it does today. If a military crisis developed,  the US will not come to Israel's aid anyway, with either a Democratic or Republican president. Truman failed in 1948. Eisenhower failed in 1956. Johnson failed in 1967. Ironically, Nixon the supposed antisemite, came through in 1973. Lucky that McGovern wasn't president. And Bush failed Israel in 2006 and again in 2007.  

wildboy as usual you are missing the point.

It's not about a political party called the Likud which I do not support, it's about the way the term Likudnink is used by Israel haters to attack anyone who supports the State of Israel.

That Obama used such a term in his speech shows his naivite about Middle Eastern issues.

Your reference to Iran was also pretty dubious, wild-boychik.

jacksondyer,

" shows his naivite about Middle Eastern issues. "

I don't think that he is naive.

Jackson,

Thank you for the kind note -- wild-boychik is one of the most flattering things anyone has said about me in a long time.  As for the Likud reference, I wasn't at the Cleveland speech but the transcript contains only one reference to Likud:  " I think there is a strain within the pro-Israel community that says unless you adopt a unwavering pro-Likud approach to Israel that you're anti-Israel and that can't be the measure of our friendship with Israel."  He never called anyone a "Likudnik", with all the opprobrium that may carry in certain circles in which I don't circulate either.  He simply made a factual observation that many in the American Jewish community take a harder-line stand on dealings with the Arabs (consistent with the position generally held by Likud, at least until the re-alignment of the right and the creation of Kadima) than are generally held by the majority of Israelis (and, yes, Israeli public opinion is fickle, but for various reasons American Jewish official opinion generally follows the most conservative Israeli line).

As for Iran, is anyone really confident that, without a major diplomatic effort at engagement (followed by a major diplomatic effort at isolation), the US or Israel have the capability to wipe out Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs?  That some kind of quick strike, followed by a long period of low-level conflict between Israel, the US and Iran wouldn't produce large-scale international terrorism, destabilization of Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and elsewhere?  That a defensive and wounded Iran wouldn't simply throttle any further domestic dissent and embark on a clandestine, full-scale effort to weaponize uranium and construct more missiles, betting that a destabilized Israel and US would not be able to keep the pressure up (and that Russia and China, alienated by the continuing violence and eager to stake out their own interests in this area, wouldn't back Iran in its clandestine ambitions)?  Obama recognizes all this; many Israelis do too, although many would prefer to take their chances anyway.

Marty, Marty. Backing Obama is the silliest thing you have ever done. Its just a weak attempt to make TNR relevant again in the Democratic Party. Yeah, right, the man dined with Edward Said, he's pro-Israel.  What makes me sleep soundly is the knowledge that you and many of the commentators to this post will be voting for John McCain this fall, no matter what protestations are made to the contrary in public. You love it!

" I think there is a strain within the pro-Israel community that says unless you adopt a unwavering pro-Likud approach to Israel that you're anti-Israel and that can't be the measure of our friendship with Israel." " Boychick

Would you mind giving me some quotes that support your contention?

Other than conservative Jews who support their conservative counterparts in Israel I don't know who argues that taking a pro-Likud approach is the same as taking a pro-Israel approach.

I have been pro-Israel all my life and I have never supported Likud's position on any issue.  

I don't want to get into a debate about Iran, here. Let's save it for a thread devoted to that issue.

The Jerusalem Post carried a report of the/a meeting in Cleveland.

-- "I think there is a strain within the pro-Israel community that says unless you adopt an unwavering pro-Likud ap-proach to Israel, then you're anti-Israel, and that can't be the measure of our friendship with Israel," leading Democratic presidential contender Illinois Senator Barack Obama said Sunday.

-- "If we cannot have an honest dialogue about how do we achieve these goals, then we're not going to make progress," he said.

-- He also criticized the notion that anyone who asks tough questions about advancing the peace process or tries to secure Israel by anyway other than "just crushing the opposition" is being "soft or anti-Israel."

www.jpost.com/.../Satellite

Spencer Ackerman, former reporting star of this magazine, got to the heart of the matter when he wrote "that is the sort of thing that a real friend of Israel says."

toohotfortnr.blogspot.com/.../iron-like-lion-in-zion.html

Obama demonstrated in this one speech that he has a far greater understanding of the relationship of the United States to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict than the editors of this magazine have gleaned over decades of wasted thought.

On Sunday, Barack Obama spoke about Israel in Cleveland. Marty, who of course is a very strong Israel

The antisemitic Big Mac is baaaaaaack............!

"Other than conservative Jews who support their conservative counterparts in Israel I don't know who argues that taking a pro-Likud approach is the same as taking a pro-Israel approach."

So let me see if I understand what you're saying. You say that there are some people in the pro-Israel community -- let's call that a strain -- who think that taking a pro-Likud approach is synonymous with taking a pro-Israel approach. In other words, there is a strain within the pro-Israel community that says unless you adopt a unwavering pro-Likud approach to Israel that you're anti-Israel.

Do I understand you correctly?

The Plank said:  "On Sunday, Barack Obama spoke about Israel in Cleveland. Marty, who of course is a very strong Israel..."

My only problem with the speech was his use of the word "Likud." Obama is to sophisticated rhetorically not to have known how the word would be understood.

Let's look up anti-semite in the jacksondyer-English bilingual dictionary

-- anti-semite - someone who disagrees with jacksondyer.

Let's look up jacksondyer in the English dictionary:

-- a moronic sychophant

And so, jerksoffdyer, I do not care what pathetic lying words you utter from the moral shithole you infest while I stand on the moral high ground watching you wallowing in shit.

The realiity jerksoffdyer seems not yet able to understand is that Obama crapped all over his bigoted world view when he said:

-- I think there is a strain within the pro-Israel community that says unless you adopt an unwavering pro-Likud ap-proach to Israel, then you're anti-Israel, and that can't be the measure of our friendship with Israel

America finally has a serious Presidential candidate who is not a gutless coward in the face of the pathetic ideology of the Likudniks. Obama realises that four decades of following the advice of the Likudnik hawks - such as TNR, Commentary and AIPAC - has been four decades of betrayal of core American values.  Hopefully, the days of our moral failure are drawing to a close.

I can't resist saying that I would never imagine seeing Mr. Peretz and ndmackenzie on the same boat.

And repeat the words of our good friend Tep: "when you're tired of The Spine, you're tired of life".

PS: Perhaps inadvertedly, ndmackenzie, I think you've made conclusively and beyond doubt the point Jackson was making since the beginning of this thread.

So you're on the same boat as Peretz and substantially confirming Jackson.

Strange times indeed...

Wow, I didn't realize that "Likud" was a slur in the American political discourse.  And here I was, all along, thinking that it was a major Israeli political party (actually a block of parties) that has represented mainstream, non-religious conservatism in Israeli politics since the mid-1970's.  Is Obama's use of that term akin to the use of the term "Democrat Party" by American conservatives?

Look, Obama is smart enough to know that the views historically espoused by the Likud Party -- full and indefinite Israeli military and political control of Jersualem, the West Bank, Gaza and the Golan Heights, support for Israeli settlement in those areas, mistrust of Palestinian intentions and reluctance (if not refusal) to discuss definitive political settlement with Palestinian representatives (combined with a preference for negotiations with non-Palestinian Arab governments to dispose of Palestinian demands) and a readiness to resort to force against Arab violence or theat thereof -- are shared by many influential people in the American Jewish community.  He also knows, from his many Jewish supporters, that these views are some ways to the right of the majority of American Jews, but that (for various reasons) more moderate Jewish voices don't tend to get heard as much in the debate.  And Obama realizes, from the experiences of other American Presidents who dealt with Israeli governments led by Likud and its successors (including Reagan and Bush II), that those views don't mesh ideally with American foreign policy goals in the Middle East.  So he's encouraging American Jewish leaders to raise more diverse views on Israel than you currently hear from the AIPAC Executive Board or the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations.  That's surely troublesome for those "conservative" Jews -- here and in Israel -- who believe that the historic Likud positions represent the best attitide for Israel and American Jewry vis-a-vis the Arabs.  But it shouldn't be troublesome for the majority of American Jews whose views on the issues are a little more nuanced.

Likid is not in power now nor was it in power in 2000 when Arafat rejected Barak's offer and started the second intifada instead. The majority of Jews stood by Israel then and later when these circumstances led to Sharon's Likud victory and later when Sharon formed Kadima to try out unilateral disengagement. I suspect that they now are close to Israeli public opinion in wanting to see Likud back in power, given Kadima's failure.

I do not know the views of AIPAC but, as a member of a typical liberal Democrat leaning Reform Synagogue I can say that the views expressed above are, basically the views of my fellow congregants. I do not know any pro-Israel Jew who was not sympathetic to Sharon during his difficult but brilliant defeat of the suicide bombing intifada. It seems that only on universities does one find Jews who are openly hostile and consider "Likudnik" to be the worst pejorative. And, yes, there are those who use the word as an anti Jewish slur.

I also find it disconcerting that the most one sided anti-Israel voice to be found on The Spine agrees with Marty on Obama.

ndmackenzie, everybody here know you haven't yet met a murderer of Jews you didn't like. You're an unwavering supporter of  Hamas, Hezbollah and whoever else murders Jews - and you never comment on anything else than Jews.

Nothing else except murder of Jews excites of you. Are you're not an anti-Semite?

Peretz says that while Obama's opinions and sharp insights on Israel and the Palestinians are not  exactly the same as his, "but they are enough like mine to let me sleep calmly".

At the risk of disturbing his sleep, I wonder how he feel about Samantha Power as the next US Ambassador to the UN.

wildboy said:

 "Wow, I didn't realize that "Likud" was a slur in the American political discourse."

Another one of your jokes, boychik.

Ask your pal mackenzie she uses the word Likudnik quite freely as in insult and she is not alone.

Fuck off mackenzie no one gives a shit what you write.

This bitch is the queen of antisemites she is  a latter day Elisabeth Marschall.

I haven't read all the previous comments but I should like to point out to Mr. Obama and/or his advisers that it was Menchem Begin's LIKUD government that produced the peace treaty with Egypt, and Nethanyahu's LIKUD that produce the Hebron accords at the Wye Plantation. It was the Likud's founder and ex-leader (before he formed Kadima) who evacuated unilaterally all of Gaza.  

sleepyavl -

You have alluded in the past to having trouble with authority figurues.  Your comments on these boards make it pretty clear that you have trouble interacting not just with authority figures but in fact with everyone around you.

You have, for example, made two comments on this thread.  In one you introduced words like "bastard", "anti-Semitic", "garbage" and "imbeciles" while in the other  you used a couple of variants of the phrase "murderer of Jews." I realise you are not a native English speaker but I have never seen anyone else in your situation who has failed to increase their English vocabulary beyond a few rote hate phrases and simple conjugations of the verb to be. You really need to broaden your vocabulary into words more useful in everyday life.

If your behavior on these comment boards is indicative of your behavior in the real world then it is inevitable that you will be disliked by many people you meet in your daily life.  You may flatter yourself that they dislike you because your are Jewish and they are closet "jew murderers" - but you will be deceiving yourself. They dislike you because on your good days you are a sociopathic moron and the rest of the time you are a moronic sociopath.

You can, of course, repeat any old garbage on these boards safe in the knowledge that being anonymous your physical personage lacks all responsibility for your vile commentary.  In the real world things are different and there I suspect your sociopathic nature will affect your ability to live and to work. No one wants to work with a sociopath regardless of how good he is at his work. My advice to you is to get some help. You might want to start by asking those around you for their honest opinion about you. Prepare to be shocked - and do not flatter yourself that they are anti-semites.

ndmackenzie, I have indeed had troubles with authority of two kinds: communists in Eastern Europe and anti-Semites like you in America. I am proud I was in trouble with such despicable people. It is because of you and people like you that there was and is Nazism, Communism and genocidal anti-Semitism. Everybody at TNR knows what an apocalyptic anti-Semite you are.

There is one glitch in your theory though: you are no authority figure by any means, you're just a bum full of hatred.

Don't you see yourself? NOTHING except murder of Jews makes you comment. You are a monster and I am absolutely convinced you have done more than just talking - either you have committed violence or you have funded murderers of Jews. That is why I hope these chat rooms are monitored by FBI and Scotland Yard. One day, they'll get you.

Otherwise I am doing very well professionally, thank you. Being a scientist does not require kowtowing to demented people who might stab Jews at any moment, as you Nazi ndmackenzie.

As for my being anonymous, I would very gladly shed anonymity for the FBI or Scotland Yard - precisely to track dangerous people like you.

You fit perfectly the psychological profile of a person who has is about to commit murderous acts. One day you'll stop posting 'cause it will be hard to post from the slammer. My guess of how you look is a female version of the Iron Hook Imam Abu Hamza. Or like Sue Blackwell, which is the same thing.

As I told you before, it warms my heart that you contribute so much to the cause of Zionism. Your uncompromising and definitely pathological hatred of Jews makes it abundantly clear that you would stop at nothing to kill Jews. Consequently, it is exactly because of people like you that Jews like me can never be safe without a strong Israel. You are definitely on my mind when I do reserve duty in the IDF. In fact, I have told some other people to check your TNR posts. Some were impressed, some weren't (although they were amused by your porn obsessions) - they had seen Nazi wolves like you coming to shout their lust for Jewish blood in the chatrooms of the English edition Ha'aretz.  

sleepyavl writes:

-- You are a monster and I am absolutely convinced you have done more than just talking - either you have committed violence or you have funded murderers of Jews. That is why I hope these chat rooms are monitored by FBI and Scotland Yard. One day, they'll get you.

Only a person who grew up up sucking on Stalin's tits would think that someone else could be arrested merely to satisfy his fantasies.

I think you should make up you up your mind, Nazi ndmackenzie. First, you don't like that I have problems with communists and anti-Semites like you. Then you make me a communist.

Well, for a pyschopath with murder lust you're remarkably undecisive. Has all that porn gone to your head? You should stick to your specialty, making pornographic stories about Peretz and jacksondyer.

I don't want you arrested for your opinions. I do hope however that you will be investigated because I am convinced that you have done far more than talking. Those Brits who bombed the London Tube or the Tel Aviv disco had exactly your profile.

Moreover, Nazi ndmackenzie, I think you owe me a thanks - I showed your posts to several people. So you're popular now!

A friend said you're a dime-store Ahmadinejad - not as good as the real thing, but hey, you're just a chatroom scarecrow after all.

sleepyavl says he doesn't want me arrested for my opinions.  Of course not, he wants me to be arrested because of HIS opinions - his paranoid delusions.

sleepyavl is sufficiently paranoid that he views everyone around him as a bastard, or an anti-semite, or an imbecile or a jew murder - and these are just on this thread. Indeed, I do not think sleepyavl has ever made a comment that does not express similar sentiments. His comments are endless outpourings of his paranoid delusions.

I will repeat my earlier advice to sleepyavl - and perhaps he can share this post with his friends. My advice to you, sleepyavl, is to get some help. You might want to start by asking those around you - work colleagues and friends - for their honest opinion about you. Prepare to be shocked - and do not flatter yourself that because they don't like you they are anti-semites. Your problem is not the world - your problem is you.

Nazi ndmackenzie, everyone knows you here. Usually people ignore you. When they do not, they express opinions similar to mine. You have never come to any debate without polluting it. You never post about anything except to express hatred towards Jews. There are people on Talkback that are interested in all sorts of things. You are interested only in Jews, and invariably when it has to with serious violence against Jews.    

I did not say you should be arrested. Maybe in your deranged mind investigation is the same as arrest. I said I hope some law enforcement agency notices you because your opinions are very close to those of British suicide bombers - and that you warrant a close look, i.e. an investigation.

For the record, when there was talk of censoring/moderating The Spine Talkback, I was against it explicitly because that may rule many of your comments out. I think you are a very effective reminder that hateful anti-Semites are not a fiction. They exist and are dangerous. That is why I would not want you censored - so that everyone sees what you have in your mind.