An American bribe that stinks of appeasement

Robert Fisk writes:

In any other country, the current American bribe to Israel, and the latter’s reluctance to accept it, in return for even a temporary end to the theft of somebody else’s property would be regarded as preposterous. Three billion dollars’ worth of fighter bombers in return for a temporary freeze in West Bank colonisation for a mere 90 days? Not including East Jerusalem – so goodbye to the last chance of the east of the holy city for a Palestinian capital – and, if Benjamin Netanyahu so wishes, a rip-roaring continuation of settlement on Arab land. In the ordinary sane world in which we think we live, there is only one word for Barack Obama’s offer: appeasement. Usually, our lords and masters use that word with disdain and disgust.

Anyone who panders to injustice by one people against another people is called an appeaser. Anyone who prefers peace at any price, let alone a $3bn bribe to the guilty party – is an appeaser. Anyone who will not risk the consequences of standing up for international morality against territorial greed is an appeaser. Those of us who did not want to invade Afghanistan were condemned as appeasers. Those of us who did not want to invade Iraq were vilified as appeasers. Yet that is precisely what Obama has done in his pathetic, unbelievable effort to plead with Netanyahu for just 90 days of submission to international law. Obama is an appeaser.

The fact that the West and its political and journalistic elites – I include the ever more disreputable New York Times – take this tomfoolery at face value, as if it can seriously be regarded as another “step” in the “peace process”, to put this mystical nonsense “back on track”, is a measure of the degree to which we have taken leave of our senses in the Middle East.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

8 thoughts on “An American bribe that stinks of appeasement

  1. chromatius

    Of course they don’t “take this tomfoolery at face value”, and to suggest they do is disingenuous at best. Their eyes are wide open, they are nothing but propagandists for militarism.

    Actually, the very suggestion is probably best described as appeasement – pandering to these self-serving liars, rather than pointedly asserting their true role and motives.

  2. blowback

    Perhaps the Iranians should demand equivalent compensation from the US to give up uranium enrichment at their forthcoming conference with the P5+1. With the “tariff” that has been established for Israel, that should be worth a couple of thousand Typhoons and enough SAMs to defend Iranian airspace. Then to ensure Iranian compliance in the future by delivering the spare parts to keep this equipment active. Ah, but allowing Iran to defend itself would be appeasement!

  3. David

    It’s worse than preposterous. This most closely resembles bribing a home invader never to do it again and his potential prosecutor never to charge him with a crime.

  4. Renfro

    I want to know whose idea this 3 billion bribe was…..was it Obama , was it Hillary, was it the idea of one of the many Israeli agents posing as US citizens at the State Department? Who was it?

    Meanwhile in the JPost this am, 39 democratic congressmen led by Barney Frank, signed a letter to Obama demanding Pollard be freed.

    gawd….if even half the Americans in this country knew even half as much as some of know about this the US-Isr “relationship”, both congress and TelAviv would have been turned into a pile of ashes long ago.

  5. Vince J

    Obama speaking and dog defecating in Washington means the same thing.
    Obama = Bush
    Bush = Chenney
    Chenney = War Crminal

  6. Norman

    Time that those here in the U.S. start broadcasting to the rest of the American citizens just what is going on. Unless of course, you agree that 350+Million U.S.Citizens are worth sacrificing for the Mad War Mongers in Israel, in which case, then you should go join them there. It’s time for Israel to grow up and stand on their own, or face the rath of those they torment.

Comments are closed.