Daily musings 5/16/2016 - IDF Ethics.

Algemeiner: Former IDF general we are not the Palestinian defense forces

The ethics of the IDF are summarized as:
1. Protect Israeli Civilians at risk of IDF soldier lives.
2. Protect IDF soldiers where doing so does not infringe on 1.
3. Perform 1-2 with minimum civilian casualties among the enemy.

The ethics prescribed by the Obama administration are in stark contrast to these. They seem to be:
1. Disengage at all costs from areas of American influence.
2. Protect the army at all costs even if this endangers the population of the US.
3. Ignore civilian casualties when targeting enemy combatants of high value using drones.

I may not be nuanced enough for Obama, but nuance destroys ethical behavior and permits what Hannah Arendt called the banalization of evil.

================

JJ: How to criticize Israel -- BY David Suissa

The order of the factors does not change the product. A mathematical axiom that applies to this piece of anti-Israeli propaganda. Saying you love Israel just before you dam it does not make you a lover of Israel.

To criticize fairly, one must present causes and address them. The rising anger of Jews in Israel at their Arab neighbors is rooted in missile strikes, stabbings, and 50 years of assaults and incitement to hatred. Anger is natural and designed to safeguard, that is why Israel is increasingly less interested in peace with its assassin Palestinian neighbors.

All one sided evaluations of Israel which doesn't even mention the problem is full of bull, and should not be printed by a reasonable Jewish Press, it should be left to our enemies to condemn us irrationally, not the PC garbage I read weekly in this paper.

Leonard Oken

Mr,Rogson and Mr.Hacker, I agree with you totally. Quite unsettling to realize that these publications are being infiltrated with...well today's version of American Jews! What will happen when we are gone and there is no one to" out " them?God willing the Moshiach will come and Israel will be so entrenched that no entity could remove her existence. Until then we must be vigilant at least to keep our sanity!

Daily Roundup - Jan 26, 2016

WAPO:Donald Trumps troubling politics of pride - Michael Gerson

Gerson paints Trump as the devil incarnate in "his ability to persuade people to support him by suspending their deepest, lifelong beliefs." Like the Devil, he has an enchanted tongue able to persuade the innocent away from the righteous path.  But of course Gerson never tells us what that path is so we could compare it to Trumps.

In fact the only factual policy comment on Trump is: ".. he is an immigration restrictionist" He also claims that he is supporting Abortion not believing his ".. rationale for his pro-life conversion". He also claims (albeit indirectly) that he bragged about affairs with married women, but he only quotes hearsay.

Lastly, and most poignantly he quotes C.S. Lewis: “The essential vice, the utmost evil is Pride,” wrote C.S. Lewis. “Unchastity, anger, greed, drunkenness, and all that, are mere flea bites in comparison; it was through Pride that the devil became the devil. Pride leads to every other vice; it is the complete anti-God state of mind.”

It must be admitted that Trump does have pride, but whether that pride is "arrogance" we have really to see since he admits to mistakes (Abortion) and has always been a deal maker which is impossible at the arrogance level ascribed to him.  To quote CS Lewis on Pride and the Serpent: "he arrogantly contradicted what God had said to Eve about eating the forbidden fruit and charged God with lying. ,,,. In the next breath, the devil drew her into deeper deception by contending that God’s reason for lying was to keep her from enjoying all the possibilities inherent in being Godlike. " See C S Lewis Institute

It is clear that Trump has warned us about following the losers in the White House or the Republican Leadership, but I hope they are not in Gerson's mind the equivalent of God.

He also gives us this precis about Trump's future:

"What does this mean for politics? A leader with an overweening, compulsive pride finds it difficult to learn or change: What of worth can others possibly teach? A narcissistic leader is always at enmity with other people and groups, and cannot be a unifying figure. As Abraham Lincoln displayed, the capacity to heal requires humility and empathy. A narcissistic leader is vindictive, keeps lists of his grievances and enemies and is vulnerable to the abuse of power. A narcissistic leader finds it difficult to feel sympathy for those regarded as failures and losers, for the wounded and disabled, for strangers, refugees and the vulnerable."

I believe this reflects badly more on Obama than Trump, after all:

1. Obama can't seem to learn from his foreign affairs disasters, 

2. He cannot meet Congress half way, he takes what he can from them legally, and then even brakes the law to achieve his purposes through royal edicts.

3. Obama has no sympathy for people, stating that the deaths of civilians and our fear of being attacked by terrorists are but pinpricks that cannot hurt our nation! Who but an insensitive, narcissistic person could so inhumanly ignore human suffering.

4. Obama has certainly kept a list of enemies and used the power of the state to go after them. Right wing organizations denied 501(c)(3) status for years or forever while friends were benefited with the status. Congress has been dealt with utter contempt including illegal denial of oversight in Benghazi, Mrs. Clinton's private insecure email preserve, and Fast and Furious. 

I have to thank Mr. Gerson for his precis on Trump. While it doesn't fit a deal maker at all, it fits a dogmatic, unbending ruler like Obama to a T.

Response to David Ignatius: In fighting the Islamic State, Obama is a tortoise and the GOP is harebrained

Response to David Ignatius Washington Post

Why the insulting "harebrained?" Isn't it sufficient that you disagree with them? There is no reason to insult. 
Whenever you run for a position, the person holding that position will have working papers that deal with all the details currently known. You, as a candidate, do not have the luxury of either knowing everything or having the time to prepare 7 years worth of experience. But you can and should state what you want to do, state it forcefully, and be able to show that you are not based on pure hot air. 
Trump has shown himself a master of this art. He sounds like hot air, but there is steel in his determination, and substance to his thought. You rail against him, but can't quite respond to his points. 
I agree with almost all you say in your analysis, except its conclusion. The President believes its ok to lose 10, 20, 3000 people here and there to terrorists. It won't affect the ability of this country of 350M people from functioning, or from being an influential part of the world. He doesn't care about the dead, not here at home and not in Syria where 300,000 have been killed, and over 2,000,000 displaced, he is all about "stability" "economic justice" and the ecology. 
He forgets that he is dealing with humans, and that we all feel in danger when random killings occur. He forgets that he is dealing with humans and we ignore far away people who express no power in our area. He is a socialist who believes that movements among the anonymous masses will arrive at the conclusion he guides them to. He knows best. He is Plato's philosopher king, and neither generals, nor humanitarians can influence him. 
God Help Us.

On the President's speech -- expectations v delivery

The President will speak tonight.  Donald Trump hopes he'll discuss the "real problem" but I doubt Obama will resign.
What I expect:
1. a lot a platitudes but no action in the Middle East
2. an out and out attack on Republicans on Gun Control and "Gun Violence"
3. A unilateral set of restriction on the ownership of guns backed only by his pen and administrative clout.
4. Perhaps an announcement that he will veto the omnibus package passed by Congress just Yesterday.
We'll see how many of my "predictions" come to pass.

------------------
On another topic. The Swedish Prime minister really is out of line.  She is now angry at Israel because not enough Israeli's die when attacked by Palestinians with knives.  Why does she believe any country or person should take into account the welfare of an attacker while they are trying to murder them?  Its both puzzling and ridiculous.

-------------------
1. Completely correct. Nothing but blah
2. Not quite, asked rather meekly for using the terribly flawed no fly list to prevent people buying guns. Would have done nothing to stop San Bernardino.
3. Thank God no. 
4. Also not, but I expect this to be a fight he will take up in the near future.

Critique of The Discipline of Gratitude-- E.J. Dionne Jr

Critique of The Discipline of Gratitude-- E.J. Dionne Jr


I agree with a lot you say, but the crack about Republicans taking "You did not build that " out of context is uncalled for.
I trace POTUS statement to John Rawls who is taught at our Universities and whose position is that almost nothing we achieve is due to some particular good we have earned.  If we are smart, it was in our genes, hence there is no accomplishment. If we succeed it is because the society we live in appreciates the skills we have developed, once again, we are without input. If we work hard, its because we have been trained by our parents to do so.

This view of the President (and Rawls, and Mrs. Clinton) negates free will, the ability to work hard because of our personal decisions based on character and will.  What Rawls (and POTUS) say is correct, but it does not explain why people with similar backgrounds and capabilities succeed and fail differently, nor does it correspond to the accepted formulation of "Survival of the Fittest"

Let's all be thankful for the gifts we inherited, those we developed, and the opportunities our village has provided for us.  But let us not forget that it is effort, personal effort which produces results.

Let's remember that the little group in Massachusetts formee a failed comune whose experiment of working and sharing in common led to hunger, starvation, and death. Only when Governor Bradford canceled socialism and let free enterprise revive, did the colony prosper. "Every family was assigned its own plot of land to work and permitted to market its own crops and products,” sell whatever overages they had. “And what was the result? ‘This had very good success,’ wrote Bradford [in his journal], ‘for it made all hands industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been.'” See Breitbart on Thanksgiving for a fuller story, or any of the myriad books written on the Pilgrims.

Obama is pro-Israel - ynet, Alon Pinkas

Alon Pinkas (Yediot 10/03/29) takes into account neither Obama's background nor his diplomacy so far.


The president is comfortable genuflecting in front of tyrants and kings, he has few words against strong men and has fervent wishes that America reform its ways.

His leftist background, his demonstrated propensity to feel for the underdog, and his definition of the underdog as the oppresse palestinians, gives the lie to Pinkases rather forced interpretations.

If the president were even handed, there would be daily briefings about the Hamas attrocities, the missiles, the tunnels, and the thousand other ways that organization is trying to wear Israel down in the south.

If he were even handed, there would be a concentrated push to resume direct talks, as was the normal diplomatic channel over the years.

Lastly, if he were even handed, he would demand that Palestinians not build a single building in East Jerusalem or Hebron, since these are disputed areas.

The president has clearly shown his cards. He will push Israel, and extort as many sacrifices as possible without asking the Palestinians for anything.

It is an even handed policy. He hits you with the right, then with the left, even handedly!

Leon