Skip to main content

View Diary: Lieberman's Israeli Import (116 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You just seemed (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    livosh1

    to be awfully sensitive to have considered anything in the comment made two posts prior to be an insult. "[D]elicate sensibilities" was a little too hostile-sounding in retrospect, so my apologies.

    (1) I never acknowledged that the other MOCs haven't voted differently than Lieberman, I said I don't know what their voting records are.  And one letter does not set the standard.  There is an entire history of Lieberman being an unabashed supporter of Israel's right wing, more so than most if not all of Congress.

    So letters don't matter, campaign platforms don't matter, and votes don't matter. OK, then. Please let me know what metric you used to conclude that Lieberman is more of "an unabashed supporter of Israel's right wing...than most if not all of Congress."

    (2) I only used torture as an example.  The same principle applies to all international law.  It's one of the first things you learn when you study international relations or international law (both of which I have studied).  Without the reaction of the international community, there is no incentive to adhere to a law.

    Well, I studied both in undergrad and law school, but I think we both know that "reaction" means a lot of different things. In the case of torture, you're right that one of the major reasons we don't want to engage in it is the "reaction" of other nations when they have American prisoners of war. That is completely irrelevant when considering a policy of expatriation of a country's own citizens. First, the retaliatory issue in torture isn't a factor here, so the only the only issue would be some form of financial penalty, through trade, aid, etc. Now, you would have to assume that Israel expects other countries would care enough to sanction her for stripping citizenship from people. Not bloody likely, and even if it was, Israel would then have to do its own cost-benefit analysis. There's no evidence that Jerusalem determined the cost to outweigh the benefit.

    Not joining the EU as an official member, but maintaining and strengthening economic ties with what is an economic entity.  

    Funny that the first sentence in your link read that "[r]elations between Israel and the European Union are generally positive." If the settlements and military actions didn't make that sentence a lie, why would you expect Israel to assume that a citizenship issue would?

    One of those considerations is the reaction of the international community because that determines trade policies.

    But you've demonstrated nothing to show that Sen. Lieberman would have reasonably believed Israel's trade to be adversely affected without U.S. legislation to that effect, or that the Israeli government believed it to be such. Further, without any evidence that they would, in fact be hurt in trade, there's nothing to support the diarist's assertion.

    Yes, my assertion is based in fact

    No, I'm afraid not.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site