The collapse into insanity that characterizes the US presidential primaries is a function of President Barack Obama’s global retreat.
I spent half my week in briefings from top political and military leaders about Israel’s regional strategic situation. The other half of my week was devoted to an analysis of America’s Mideast policy and the tracking of US presidential primaries.
The first half of my week filled me with confidence; the second half with despondency.
It is a time of strategic ascendancy for Israel.
Alas, it is a time of self-inflicted strategic decline for America.
Israel is growing in regional influence; America is shrinking. The implications are far-reaching.
Israel’s enhanced preeminence is a function of Arab state meltdown, Iran’s drive for regional hegemony, and the resultant search for new defense and political alliances.
Israel’s importance also derives from its technological prowess and economic perspicacity.
Consequently, Egypt, the Gulf states, Russia, China, India and non-European democracies are pounding the pavement to Israel’s doorstep to make common strategic cause – some more openly than others, but defiantly so. We share intelligence and knowhow, plan diplomatic strategy, and trade in quality goods. We form a bulwark against radical and subversive forces.
All the countries involved in these ascending relationships know that Israel is stable, credible and consistent in building and fulfilling its alliance responsibilities. It is a loyal partner. It understands the necessity of military power in statecraft; and knows how to utilize it, when necessary.
Alas, that is no longer the case with America, after seven years of President Barack Obama. The US has telegraphed its fatigue, and is begging to retreat from global leadership.
The Obama administration has abdicated regional predominance to Putin’s Russia and Khamenei’s Iran, while devoting only lip service to the fight against jihadist Islam.
It has brow-beaten its friends, and bowed before its adversaries. It has abandoned its erstwhile friends, and squandered its prestige.
The administration also has fed the American people and the global community a series of falsehoods that are transparently illusory, like: al-Qaida has been defeated, ISIS has been overwhelmed, Iran has been contained, and Russia has been reset or tamed.
Worst of all, the Obama administration seems to have set the stage for the collapse into insanity that characterizes the 2016 US presidential primaries.
Only an American public so starved for pathways out of the muck into which Obama has dragged the country, in both domestic and foreign affairs, could be tempted into supporting demagogues like Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders.
Only a voter desperate for renewed American “greatness” (Trump) and/or American “magic” (Sanders), and seeking a supernatural wand that will break the sissy spell that Obama has cast over America – could break for the asinine extremes.
With their volatile temperaments, these outlier candidates promise only confusion.
One day they talk about deep retrenchment from American global commitments; the next, about more aggressiveness in global affairs. A swashbuckling foreign policy one day; a flaccid, uncaring foreign policy the next. Mega-capitalism one day; super-socialism the next.
America appears to be a forlorn country that is scraping the bottom of the barrel to find a radical antidote to Obama – a failed messiah if there ever was one. In the process, it risks becoming a laughingstock, not just an indisposed and confused superpower.
Everywhere in the world, people are asking: Is Trump or Sanders really the wisest commander in chief that Americans can conjure up? How much longer can this scary campaign continue before all the bolts start coming loose on the USS America? Have Americans fallen off their rocker? Needless to say, any extended fall of America from strategic acuity and sensible policy- making has seismic implications for Israel.
It’s true, as described above, that today Israel enjoys new diplomatic maneuverability and strategic depth that does not run through Washington. But so much of Israel’s armament, political cover and moral support are still dependent on the US. No less than Americans, Israelis cannot afford further American political folly.
Eight years of Obamanian arrogance and waywardness was enough. Please, America, get a grip and elect yourself a levelheaded leader!
www.davidmweinberg.com
@ Bear Klein:
thanks
href=”#comment-63356000166531″ title=”Go to comment of this author”>bernard ross:Report: Russia, Israel, to Sign Free Trade Agreement
Read more at http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/61277/report-russia-israel-sign-free-trade-agreement-jerusalem/#qDkMcGJpimvzsdFy.99
http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Politics-And-Diplomacy/Israel-Russia-reportedly-say-Da-to-free-trade-agreement-444721
@ babushka:
Oh, and another thing. Jesus was not the Messiah. Could not have been. The Messiah will be from the House of David. The Bible says Joseph was from the House of David, but Joseph was not the father of Jesus, so what his lineage was is utterly irrelevant. The bizarre aspect that Joseph apparently has to very different lines of heritage is another matter, but then again, not relevant as it pertains to Jesus. Mary appears to be of the House of Levi. So, Jesus was of the House of Levi, not the House of David, and the Messiah must be from the House of David. Jesus can not possibly have been the promised Messiah.
Now, it’s commonly accepted among scholars that the lineages in the NT are not factually correct, but why are they there at all? I mean, if the author of Matthew (whoever he was) created the lineage, why through Joseph? That makes no sense if the author of Matthew considered Mary to be a virgin at conception. The fact that the lineage is there at all proves that the authorship of Matthew pre-dates the idea that of Jesus’ immaculate conception. In other words, the author of Matthew didn’t assume Mary was a virgin but that Jesus was conceived through the vaginal penetration of Mary by Joseph.
The concept of immaculate conception was added much later, as Christianity gained popularity in Greece, a region that considered immaculate conception as “holy”.
The Bible translators even went in to the old Jewish texts and altered them to fit with the new idea of immaculate conception. You are probably familiar with the phrase from Isaiah: “Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel” – may vary a little depending on which English translation you read. However, is that what the text of Isaiah actually says? No, it is not. Isaiah actually says more like: “A young woman is with child (already pregnant when Isaiah speaks) shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel”. In other words, Isaiah is not talking about some event in a distant future, he’s talking about something that will happen in his own time. Isaiah lived about 700 years BC, so if he was talking about Mary, she’d have to be about 700 years old when she (still a virgin) gave birth to Jesus, after the pregnancy from Hell, lasting 700 years.
The reality is – the Bible translators just fudged it a little to make it match with the ideas of Christianity.
So, yeah, quoting this stuff as true shows staggering amounts of ignorance.
@ babushka:
Funny, particularly given the topic of the site you are conducting this discussion on. Here is some news for you, and you might want to investigate this just a little bit. The bible is fiction. Almost 100%. Even The New Testament. Let’s just take one important event and look at it without being utterly ignorant. The arrest and conviction of the person called Jesus.
He was broght before the Sanhedrin twice, late at night on Thursday and again on Friday morning. He was accused of Blasphemy. There are a number of problems with this:
1/ The Sanhedrin NEVER met at night, they were not allowed to. Also, they would never have conducted official business during Passover. If Jesus was arrested on Thursday somewhere around 9 or 10 pm it was already Passover, the trial would not have started until AFTER Passover.
1a/ According to the NT, the Sanhedrin met at the house of the High Priest. BZZZZT. WRONG. They never did, and since Jesus had not committed a crime, they had no reason to break Jewish law to hold a trial. The Sanhedrin could only meet in the Chamber of Hewn Stone in the Temple
1b/ Saying that a member of the Sanhedrin would spit on an accused, as the NT says is like saying that a US Supreme Court Judge would step down from the bench during a trial and spit on a defendant. It would never happen. The proceedings of the Sanhedrin were intensely formal affairs. Like a US Supreme Court hearing.
3/ The things Jesus was accused of according to the NT would probably be seen as blasphemous to a Christian if Jesus was not the Messiah. To the Jews, Jesus claiming to be the Messiah was NOT, and is not, blasphemous in the least, since the Jewish Messiah is not divine in any way. The Sanhedrin would not care that Jesus claimed to be the Messiah. In other words, according to Jewish law Jesus had done nothing wrong.
4/ The Romans didn’t execute people who had broken Jewish law. Everywhere the Romans occupied they let the local authorities handle ALL legal cases, EXCEPT crimes against Romans or the Roman Empire. If the Jews came to ask Pilate to execute Jesus he’d have told them “Piss off and handle your own problems”. The bible says Jesus was crucified by the Romans and that would ONLY have happened if he was a threat to the Roman empire or if he had committed grievous crimes against Romans. Some apologists claim that only the Romans could execute criminals, but this is wrong, and well documented as wrong, even in the Bible it self at the stoning of a woman that Jesus interrupted.
5/ So, we’ve established that Jesus didn’t break Jewish law, so there was no reason for the Sanhedrin to get involved. HOWEVER, things take a different turn when we get to Pilate. Now the Sanhedrin accuse Jesus of sedition. Now THAT is a serious crime against the Roman power. VERY serious. Pilate asks Jesus point blank if he’s seditious. Jesus answers in the affirmative. At that point, since confession is always accepted as true in Roman law, Pilate has STRONG reason to execute Jesus. But according to the NT, Pilate him self thinks he doesn’t. He waffles. He sees nothing wrong. Pilate, the man so gruesome and so full of hatred towards Jews that he was eventually stripped of powers, brought back to Rome and tried for his crimes against the Jews, thinks that a seditious Jew is innocent and has done nothing wrong? NEVER. It’s an absurd situation and we KNOW it can not have happened.
The Gospel accounts of the last days of the life of Jesus simply cannot be correct. It’s simply not possible. This is just one example. The Bible, from the first page, is FULL of such problems and cannot possibly be anywhere near to true.
Quoting it is for ignorant zealots who are either refusing to learn about reality or too dumb to have the ability.
Bible quoting is for people who possess the wisdom to acknowledge that there exist eternal truths which transcend their own finite experience, in contradistinction to childishly narcissistic atheists for whom God exists solely as a reflection in the mirror.
Insofar as your vendetta against goat herders is concerned, do I detect an undertone of carnal jealousy?
@ babushka:
How are the GOP members different? Jesse Helms is one of the worst. The GOP hasn’t been pro individual liberties since long before McCarthy. The “modern” GOP is identical to the Democrats here, they want to limit free speech they find offensive. The problem is that only when the truly offensive is allowed do you have free speech. The only difference between the GOP and the Democrats in this regard is WHAT they want to ban, not that one wants to ban free speech and the other not.
@ babushka:
Bible quoting is for ignorant people who actually believe in fairy tales invented by ignorant goat herders from the bronze age. When adults do it it’s just sad.
Guns are good fun, and I thoroughly enjoy a day at the range. The reality however, is that most people are wholly unqualified to own guns. Why? Well
When a person in the US buys a gun
– his chance of being killed by one increases DRAMATICALLY
– the chance that his children are killed by one increases dramatically
– the chance that his wife is killed by a gun increases dramatically
– the chance that he will be able to use it to defend him self increases not at all
Which gun is more likely to kill you? In order? Yours. Your fathers. Your mothers. Your child’s, your siblings. Compared to these, the chance of you being shot by a strangers gun is almost non-existent. It’s extremely rare compared to you being shot by yours, or a family members gun.
As a fiscally conservative, you’d possibly call me libertarian, my preferred policies are FAR to the right of ANY GOP member in the US today. I am less liberal than the entire GOP put together. Fiscally. That shouldn’t prevent me from being rational though.
Free trade agreements are crucial for decoupling from an increasingly unreliable America:
http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Politics-And-Diplomacy/Israel-Russia-reportedly-say-Da-to-free-trade-agreement-444721
Bear Klein Said:
where did you read this, I dont remember it?
Bible quoting is virtuous.
Gun toting is essential.
Half wit is better than liberal by half.
Last night’s Democrat presidential debate was a tidal wave of fascism. There is no personal liberty the Democrats don’t want to eviscerate nor personal property they don’t want to confiscate.
Obama is more anti-Semitic than the Russians, which given the history of Russia is a staggering feat of immorality.
EU & USA decline shown in the fact that little Israel is about to sign a free trade agreement with Russia. My guess is that their will be no labeling clause about products from Judah/Samaria.
The Trump bashing is that of a reflexive leftist.
Trump can be flamboyant, bombastic and at times PI (politically incorrect), but he is not a conservative. That is not an indictment of the Republicans so much as it is an indictment of the Democrats and the MSM (but I repeat myself) and how far left and America-hating they have become.
Trump is actually both populist and centrist. However, he is also something that most Democrats are not – patriotic.
Let me add one other point — recently, a prominent German journalist spent time with ISIS, and perhaps his biggest takeway was that ISIS feared one and only one military — Israel’s.
Its a pity we were unable to glean the fruits of this massive one week endeavor from this incredibly superficial article… short on facts long on the usual BS PC
I didn’t see any demagoguery in either, just the facts, ma’am. This author appears to “not get it”, out of the loop, back in the day, not up to speed…..irrelevant and passed by events in reality he just does not understand so he has to defame and delegitimize to cover for his ignorance and lack of judgment.
LoL, weinberg appears to be the only one confused here. The facts he presented prior to presenting his opinions, judgments and conclusions were already well known be every reader of Israpundit and already widely discussed to a deeper level than this johnny come lately superficial author has presented here. I see no link provided by him from his conclusions to the facts he presented…. but what can one expect from a man who actually boasts about the fact that he spent a week as if one week is more than the least of efforts to obtain knowledge and arrive at conclusions.
really, what a dunce. I think he is searching for the security of a dogmatic consistency that one finds in ideological isms as opposed to reality. He failed, understandable to give the details of why a candidate might have different approaches to different scenarios.
apparently this einstein cannot see that the “bolts already came off” which is why the intelligent non ideological voters, who can think outside of an ideology and the existent corruption and waste, are reacting sensible to the existing rot by seeking to clear the house of all the existing BS artists and bought pols.
I notice he has no one to recommend out of the other “level headed candidates”. One always appears “level headed” when taking bribes and mouthing consistent ideological positions
See, this brilliant observer thinks its just about Obama and that the past 30 years of betrayal by both parties has nothing to do with it.
You give yourself away with such clichés.
If the vast majority of the Republicans are as you describe them above, to what do you attribute the voting – twice – for that intellectual, Obama? A Harvard graduate no less. Must be, as you imply, the seriously intelligent bent of the Democrat voters.
Now you favour Bloomberg, who, from what I have seen, can be rated as a Sanders-lite candidate; another nanny-state promoter.
>> could be tempted into supporting demagogues like Donald
>> Trump and Bernie Sanders
That’s just silly. Seriously. The current state of affairs in the US has nothing whatsoever to do with Obama, it started long before that. Let me explain:
George W. Bush is not an idiot. Nowhere near so. Read transcripts from his debates before becoming governor of Texas, and you will see that. He is well-spoken and serious. However, going for president, well-spoken and intelligent-sounding doesn’t cut it if you are a Republican. Even back then. You had to sound like the retarded neighbor from next door who’s unemployed and drunk half the time since that is “your buddy”, and you “sure as hell ain’t not going to vote for one of them book-wormy intellectuin atteisms”. That is, of course, if your a GOP voter. So, Bush decided that sounding un-educated, dumb and half-retarded was going to win him the election. He was right.
The GOP has been anti-science, anti-reason, anti-intellectual since about Ronald Reagan. The current state of affairs in the GOP was probably summed up best by the fake Donald Trump quote:
“If I were to run [for president], I’d run as a Republican. They’re the dumbest group of voters in the country. They believe anything on Fox News. I could lie and they’d still eat it up.”
I know he never said this, but if he did, in many regards he would be entirely correct. The GOP base has become a bible-quoting, gun-toting bunch of half-wits, and in order to win an election you have to appeal to them. The smart republicans will vote the GOP no matter what and you don’t have to appeal to them.
Keeping this game up for a couple of decades and the real demagogues are going to surface and do well.
As for Sanders. Sigh. He’s not a product of anything else than the fact that Hilary Clinton, outside of the Democratic core, is one of the most reviled women in the US. Hopefully she’ll lose the primaries while Trump wins, opening the path for Bloomberg as the only sane choice in the actual election. Both parties would do well if an independent wins this time around.