Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth
You really disappoint me (in this topic), John.
There is nothing good about what is happening. But you mentioned the key words: 'American Politics'. There's Iranian politics, Russian politics, Israeli politics, Saudi politics, Qatari politics; all in the mix.
At the core of this lies Israel and its existence. Israel (government) has made serious mistakes in their treatment of Palestinians which, I agree, is designed to frustrate a 2-state solution. That design is entirely political due to the Likud-Ultra coalition. Getting them out, is down to the Israeli population and I'm not optimistic given the number of Ultras in the population.
In the light of what I've just written, we seem to converge. But we then diverge as to how Israel should have reacted to the Hamas butchery. And none of you can properly address my question:
Should Israel have done nothing in retaliation for the Hamas atrocities? That would have been the only way of avoiding the civilian casualties.
|
Your persistent question at the end has been answered, comprehensively, on a number of occasions.
I framed the his job as such because that’s what it is. Framing it any other way makes it debatable. Would the American Secretary of State hold more clout around the world than the political leaders of Israel, or Jewish leaders of other countries such as Zelensky? Potentially, especially in the current climate of a barely coherent US President when allowed to speak for more than a sound bite.
Would that make him the most influential Jew in world politics? Potentially, but I see no value in sidetracking the debate so framing him within American politics, which ranks every cabinet level position in it’s line of succcession, seemed most straightforward and uncontroversial.