Not All Zionists View Zionism the Same

Submitted by M. Tovey (United States), Sep 21, 2011 at 19:01

So, let us then review the points of your observation, surely without your objection to the fact of its bias. It is interesting that while I would definitely categorize Richard Cheney as a staunch conservative with definitive views on how Israel should be treated by the American perspective, it is a position that was confirmed by the current American Chief executive to the United Nations. If anyone could be called out for pandering to nation-building, the 'Palestinian' call for statehood in the U. N. is a more recent example that flies in the face of your assertion. But calling Mr. Cheney a Zionist in view of his connection to the Bush administration's position on the 'Road Map to Peace,' that's one to think about.

1. American intervention in the eyes of the Middle Eastern conclaves is, by your own admission, seen differently for all the reasons you can come up with. But remember, America was not the world power house back in 1803 it is now, then when U. S Marines were confronted with the Muslim inspired pirates of that day interfering with trade routes. It went downhill from there. Further, death and destruction in the Philippines etc., at the hands of others than Americans were part and parcel of the original changes in culture not caused by Americans. While it is definitely certain that cultural differences do exist between the American style and others, it cannot be denied that the death cultures practiced in the absence of American influences are not any better.

2. America's problem in the purported failures of extending democracy to other nations is that there is a misunderstanding of the freedom and independence Americans enjoy that other cultures seem reluctant and cannot embrace. That is why it appears Islam does have its ability to extend its influences, just because American societal style is not only not wanted, it is incompatible with Muslim ideology. Just as an aside, the only thing that can claim a particular Scottish influence in the vernacular of the American elite circles is golf.

3. Americans actually do have an understanding of history, and of how to make a mark on it. You allude earlier to 'odd' exceptions of Japan and Germany, which betrays your limited understanding of history as likely presented by a biased perception based strictly upon the ideologies you are willing to submit to. So be it. But you have left being careful by your unfettered use of the word 'tyranny,' also coloring you assertions in the same way one might suppose an anarchist or Marxist would employ. Further, you are definitely not going to make a successful argument by trying to link Israel with the likes of Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, a contradiction of empathies if ever there was one.

4. America was never intended to be popular with the Arab world, a world that was not a major concern to America until World War One when the British consorted with the Arabic communities and World War Two when America was faced with siding with Israel after the mufti's of the Middle East consorted with the Third Reich against the Jewish populations already resident in the Middle East.

5. America has already had its fill of Islam 'preaching' its rhetoric, now not needing to go to places like Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, etc. We have had our fill of it since 1803, 1949, 1956, 1967, 1973, 1983, 1993, and of course, September 11, 2001. Now before you once again repeat that same epithet that Americans deserved it, let it again be said to all who think that (even some Americans), if Islam is indeed the peace-loving religion so many claim it tries to be, quit the 'preaching' and live in the love that peace calls for. By your own argument and those of others, you do not need America to teach you how, do you?

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".