Posted on 03/07/2008 10:56:35 AM PST by SJackson
A follow-up to my post yesterday about the troubling views of one of Barack Obamas top foreign policy advisers, Samantha Power. In 2002 she sat for an interview with Harry Kreisler, the director of the Institute for International Studies at Berkeley. Kreisler asked her the following question:
Let me give you a thought experiment here, and it is the following: without addressing the Palestine - Israel problem, lets say you were an advisor to the President of the United States, how would you respond to current events there? Would you advise him to put a structure in place to monitor that situation, at least if one party or another [starts] looking like they might be moving toward genocide?
Get a load of Powers response:
What we dont need is some kind of early warning mechanism there, what we need is a willingness to put something on the line in helping the situation. Putting something on the line might mean alienating a domestic constituency of tremendous political and financial import; it may more crucially mean sacrificing or investing, I think, more than sacrificing billions of dollars, not in servicing Israels military, but actually investing in the new state of Palestine, in investing the billions of dollars it would probably take, also, to support what will have to be a mammoth protection force, not of the old Rwanda kind, but a meaningful military presence. Because it seems to me at this stage (and this is true of actual genocides as well, and not just major human rights abuses, which were seen there), you have to go in as if youre serious, you have to put something on the line.
Unfortunately, imposition of a solution on unwilling parties is dreadful. Its a terrible thing to do, its fundamentally undemocratic. But, sadly, we dont just have a democracy here either, we have a liberal democracy. There are certain sets of principles that guide our policy, or that are meant to, anyway. Its essential that some set of principles becomes the benchmark, rather than a deference to [leaders] who are fundamentally politically destined to destroy the lives of their own people. And by that I mean what Tom Freidman has called Sharafat. [Sharon-Arafat; this is actually an Amos Oz construction NP] I do think in that sense, both political leaders have been dreadfully irresponsible. And, unfortunately, it does require external intervention.
Just so were clear here: Power said that her advice to the President would be to 1) Alienate the American Jewish community, and indeed all Americans, such as evangelical Christians, who support the state of Israel, because 2) Israeli leaders are destroying the lives of their own people. 3) Pour billions of dollars of the taxpayers money into the new state of Palestine; 4) Stage an American ground invasion of Israel and the Palestinian territories what else can she mean by a mammoth protection force and a military presence that will be imposed by external intervention? in order to do the exact same thing that she considers the height of arrogance and foolishness in Iraq: an American campaign to remake an Arab society.
Note that this wasnt her response to a question about her personal views of the conflict, or about what she envisions might be a utopian solution to the conflict; it was a response to a question about what she would tell the President of the United States if she was his adviser. Yesterday Barack Obama took a large stride toward the presidencyhelped in some small measure by the speeches on behalf of the Obama campaign that Power has deliveredand it is time that someone asked him, while he is still a candidate, what he thinks of the perverse things his many foreign policy advisers have said about Israel and the Middle East.
As Samantha Power herself acknowledged, there is a domestic constituency of tremendous political and financial import that would like to know where Obama stands on these matters.
|
www.DiscoverTheNetwork.org |
Date: 3/7/2008 2:45:45 PM |
|
|
|
|
ALI ABUNIMAH |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just so were clear here: Power said that her advice to the President would be to 1) Alienate the American Jewish community, and indeed all Americans, such as evangelical Christians, who support the state of Israel, because 2) Israeli leaders are destroying the lives of their own people. 3) Pour billions of dollars of the taxpayers money into the new state of Palestine; 4) Stage an American ground invasion of Israel and the Palestinian territories what else can she mean by a mammoth protection force and a military presence that will be imposed by external intervention? in order to do the exact same thing that she considers the height of arrogance and foolishness in Iraq: an American campaign to remake an Arab society.
Actually, the ‘Rats will hopefully lose some of the Jewish vote even if HRC is their nominee. Obama has his pro-Pali advisors, but remember that Hitlery has Huma Abedin, plus that infamous kiss of Suha Arafat and that history of antisemitic outbursts which she would be trying to downplay during the campaign.
I don't know. Perhaps a better question, what qualifications does she have to be a key foreign policy advisor. She's a professor, and wrote a book on genocide and the world's lack of reaction, as I remember it a pretty good historical look at the issue. I don't remember much anything about palestinians, a lot about Armenia and the lack of world reaction to Raphael Lemkin's warnings in the 1930s That's about it. Not a particularly impressive resume for a Presidential advisor. Of course better than his, state political hack and two inconsequential years in the Senate.
Should have noted, that Obama was at a fundraiser thrown by with Edward Said as the speaker there is no question. The late Mr. Said, Columbia professor, supping with the Obamas and throwing rocks at Jews in Lebanon.

The participants contend it was to raise funds for the local community.
That pair of pictures should show up on every Obama thread.
I have a real problem with any American who supports anyone who wants to commit or even allow genocide.
If I heard correctly on Mark Levin’s radio show today, Ms. Power was just dismissed from the Obama campaign. Not because of her assinine ideas on the Middle East, mind you, but because she called HRC a “monster” and her remark was picked up by a Scottish newspaper. Apparently you can’t call your opponent such an “obscene” name if you are a ‘Rat going up against Her Royal Thighness in a primary.
Lets us pray night & day that this Obami-nation & his cronies becomes a walking disaster. I pray that he will wilt & self-destruct into nothingness by his own reckless words.
IIRC, the first country to recognize the State of Israel was actually the Soviet Union, and they sent small arms to Israel. Of course, that was more to hasten the British evacuation than anything else... And I believe that Israel bought most of its early air force from France.
Mark
A Dhimmi if I ever saw one.
Do you understand that every single time Israel wants to protect its citizens - America comes in and says please STOP, peace must go forward, remove your checkpoints, give up your land, stop retaliating, give up Jerusalem, our capital.<<<
Oh please! There goes the blame America first for all your woes. Then stop sending your Leaders here to Washington anytime there is a flare up there. Why did you leaders come here when you bombed Lebanon when it was getting too hot for you to handle? Further, how many BILLIONS in aid do we send you? Just say STOP the billions in aid. Never bite the hands that feed you. Your enemies are ISLAMICS - not America - the ONLY friend you have in the world. Never bite the hands that feed you. Give up Jerusalem? No way - the Christians want it preserved.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.