Israel largely runs US foreign policy in the region - to a degree which is truly remarkable and which highlights the flaws in the US political system - as often this is to the detriment of US interests in themselves.
This is bigoted bullshit, you should be ashamed. The fact that the conspiracy obsessed far right agrees with you, should tell you all you need to know.
The government of Israel is separate from American Jews. Neither of them have any special position in US law or politics that isn't available to any other well organized ethnic or other interest group. They're just very good at what they do. They have great influence, but they've earned it the same way everyone else does.
AIPAC and the Saudi lobby are roughly equal in power, although the basis for that is power is quite different (grass roots in one case, oil power in another case).
Nobody cares about the Kurds - except the Kurds themselves - and they don't matter - therefore nobody cares
Well, some people do care. To me, the protection of the Kurds under the no-fly zones, and their liberation after the invasion, will go down in history. They represent the third Middle Eastern region (other than Turkey and Israel) who have embraced democracy, pluralism, and reasonably secular government. They are corrupt as hell, and they need to resolve their dispute with Turkey, but all that can be worked on.
As Christopher Hitches has documented, the Kurds are also a fine example of how true, secular socialist ideas can take root in the Muslim world. Can someone please explain to me why Progressives don't embrace the Kurds, or at least, the Kurdish socialists? Are we pretending that Saddam was somehow an authentic socialist? __ I am the most conservative Unitarian-Universalist you will ever meet.
There are other analogues to AIPAC, of course: the Cuban exiles running policy on Cuba or the Armenians having a disproportionate influence globally on policy with regard to Turkey. None of these groups have an influence that is obviously of benefit to wider US interests: AIPAC, on behalf of the extreme Israeli nationalists, is just the one with the influence in the most dangerous place on earth and is the one tied up with all sorts of bizarre and scary religious beliefs, prejudices and twisted propaganda from all sides. Nor, of course, does AIPAC speak for American Jews, so I really don't know why you mentioned them.
Further, progressives do care about the Kurds. But progressives are not in power. And those who are in power demonstrably do not care about the Kurds. Unless they can use them as a whip to bully Turkey with (or, as in the case of the no-fly zones, use them as an excuse to weaken an uncooperative former client state's hold on its natural resources).
And, well, I never understood the degree of support the US lavishes upon Israel. I can understand holding your hand under a client state, and I can understand favouring the most dependent client states over the more independent. But considering the number of enemies and other headaches the US gets out of supporting Israel, I have to wonder why they think it's worth the bother.
- Jake If you only spend 20 minutes of the rest of your life on economics, go spend them here.
To me, the protection of the Kurds under the no-fly zones, and their liberation after the invasion, will go down in history. They represent the third Middle Eastern region (other than Turkey and Israel) who have embraced democracy, pluralism, and reasonably secular government. They are corrupt as hell, and they need to resolve their dispute with Turkey, but all that can be worked on.
Anyway, I pointed out in the diary that mediating in the Turkish-Kurdish conflict is an important task that the EU must attempt. I just don't think it's all that easy. When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
