Krauthammer Finally and Totally Loses It!
Readers know that I have long believed that Charles Krauthammer is out of his mind. And they know that I don't believe that only because he's a right-wing extremist and a neocon promoter of everything evil in American foreign policy. For instance, I don't think Bill Kristol is nuts. I just think that he's a right-wing extremist and a neocon promoter of everything evil in American foreign policy.
But Krauthammer is different because he is such a complete hater. Hate is his life-blood and he demonstrates that at every opportunity. Additionally, I had that amazing experience of watching him flip out in synagogue on Yom Kippur in 2001 when he began to bellow (from his pew) at the rabbi for saying that ultimately there must be peace in the Middle East. It was the first and only time I've ever seen anyone bellow from his seat at the rabbi -- on Yom Kippur no less.
But today Charles ratchets it up.
In his Washington Post column, he calls on the government of the United States to issue a formal foreign policy pledge Krauthammer calls "The Holocaust Declaration."
It would read as follows: "It shall be the policy of this nation to regard any nuclear attack upon Israel by Iran, or originating in Iran, as an attack by Iran on the United States, requiring a full retaliatory response upon Iran. As a beacon of tolerance and as leader of the free world, the United States will not permit a second Holocaust to be perpetrated upon the Jewish people."
Now, I am as devoted to Israel's survival as Krauthammer (more actually, as unlike him I do not favor policies that lead to more and more Israeli dead). Plus, my kids are first generation Americans (my wife was born in a Displaced Person camp in Germany. Her parents were Polish Jews who survived the Holocaust). So I am certainly as sensitive to the Holocaust as the neocon warrior from Chevy Chase.
But, unlike Krauthammer, I do not believe that Israeli or Jewish lives are worth more than American or African or Asian or Arab lives. Unlike Krauthammer, I understand that my political worldview has to extend beyond caring for my own people. Krauthammer cares about Israel and the Jews because he is Jewish. That's it. If he was born Irish Catholic, he would be obsessed with unifying Ireland. He's a 19th century style ethnic chauvinist.
He is stridently indifferent to the suffering (and murder) of other peoples because he is not connected to them. He laughs at the suffering of Palestinians. He trivializes the slaughter America helped trigger in Iraq.
And, when he is not mocking, he is simply indifferent to human suffering by any peoples he is not ethnically connected to. He even calls John McCain's opposition to torture "moral preening" and dissed the late Christopher Reeve for giving the disabled "false hope."
As I said, he's a hater.
Imagine if we all were like Charles Krauthammers. Polish Americans would demand 37 word declarations that the United States will go to war to defend Poland against the Russians or Germans who (between them) slaughtered over three million Polish Jews and three million Polish Catholics in this century. African Americans would demand that America declare that mass murder in Africa is an attack on America and should be responded to as such. Ukrainian-Americans who were slaughtered by the Soviets under Lenin and Stalin would demand that we pledge to go to war with Russia if the Russians invade (lately they have been threatening to point their nukes at Kiev). Armenians, Cambodians, Bosnians, Kosovars and Rwandans would all demand similar pledges.
I mean, just imagine if we all were Krauthammers and only cared about our own group. The world, terrible as it is, would be infinitely worse.
This is not to trivialize the Iranian threat. It's serious. If Krauthammer really cared about the possibility of an Iranian attack on Israel (I do), he would call for the United States to open unconditional negotiations with the Iranian regime. In the past the Iranians have said that if we promise not to overthrow their regime, they will not only help us in Iraq but also drop their threats against Israel. That offer is on the table.
But Krauthammer would rather put this whole country (and Israel) at risk of attack rather than simply talk to the Mullahs.
The man is nuts. Bellowing at rabbis on Yom Kippur is the least of his problems.
I am grateful when others read Krauthammer so I don't have to.
May I differ on one point---Iran is less of a threat than Stalin was. Even the inscrutable Soviet Union was in fact not interested in world domination (any more than we were, and perhaps less). They were, however, terrified of our nuclear weapons. No leader could have refrained from seeking parity in weapons.
Iran is not a threat---they are an awkward diplomatic issue.
April 11, 2008 10:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Once again, I disagree with you.
Kraughammer has been nuts for years.
April 11, 2008 10:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
MJ,
Krauthammer appears regularly in The Bucks County Courier Times. I put him in the same group I put Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, Jack Kelly of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, and others that I can read or listen to for no more than one paragraph or 5 minutes. They're all hate purveyors in their own way.
Anyone who believes Iran would nuke Israel needs to see a psychiatrist.
Maybe Krauthammer is Ann Coulter's alter ego? He needs to see a psychiatrist and get himself on Lithium; physician, heal thyself.
April 11, 2008 10:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, I wouldn't have a problem in principle with such a declaration. It has long been my view that the United States need not engage in any pre-emptive action against Iran, because even if Iran should some day develop a nuclear capability, Iran can be successfully deterred the old-fashioned way - through threatened massive retaliation. It is precisely this kind of nuclear umbrella which deterred the use of nuclear weapons by either side during the Cold War.
Of course, I think our ultimate aim should be de-proliferation and the total elimination of nuclear weapons, so I see the offer of this kind of security umbrella as an intermediate stage of the path toward that ultimate goal.
It has often been the claim of neocons and their ilk that Iran cannot be deterred in this way, because the Iranian leaders are a bunch of crazy suicide-bombing terrorist fanatics, who would gladly accept the incineration of most of their country in exchange for the opportunity to destroy Israel. That's why they think Iran's government must be toppled, and its nuclear capabilities - peaceful or otherwise - pre-emptively destroyed. I believe this view is somewhat hysterical, and involves a complete misperception of the nature of the Iranian state. So I actually view it as a sign of modest progress that Krauthammer is willing to think in more conventional deterrence-based terms.
By the way, I have another proposal. If Israel were willing to remove all of its settlements, troops and military installations from the occupied territories, and accept a fixed internationally recognized border along the Green Line, I would be willing to support the admission of Israel into the United States as the 51st state, should Israelis themselves desire it.
April 11, 2008 10:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
"If Israel were willing to remove all of its settlements, troops and military installations from the occupied territories, and accept a fixed internationally recognized border along the Green Line, I would be willing to support the admission of Israel into the United States as the 51st state, should Israelis themselves desire it."
They don't.
April 11, 2008 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not now, in 2008. But perhaps someday, as their situation becomes less tenable.
April 11, 2008 4:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
We're already too wrapped up in their problems as it is.
April 11, 2008 5:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I came across that article this morning too. Not a big fan of Charles. He has a naturally divisive reflex to any topic. There should be a threat level assessment assigned to every article he writes. In today's column, he talks about Iran's nuclear activity and as I understand it, according to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, they have an inalienable right to develop nuclear power for peaceful purposes. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency's February 2008 assessment, there is no evidence, zero, that Iran is seeking or developing a nuclear weapon. Even if they were, I wouldn't blame them. Every day, they live with the prospect of an imminent attack by the U.S.
The pre-emptive war doctrine is the most dangerous in American history. If the U.S. ever does take unwarranted action against Iran, Israel will become less safe.
In my opinion, Israel is less safe with Krauthammer advocating on its behalf.
April 11, 2008 10:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Israel already has Nukes. Iran has yet to get them. Should the US also consider an attack on Iran by Israel in the same manner. I do not expect Israel to actually ever do so, but if we are going to be seen as even handed, when it comes to such things, shouldn't we also provide the same protection against a nuclear holocaust been rained down on the Iranian people.
Is the US the only good global cop, when it comes to policing and preventing the use of Nuclear weapons on civilian populations. Does any one happen to have the record of which countries, so far, which have actually nuked other nations. Can anyone provide the details of which countries have actually done so.
April 11, 2008 11:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why on earth would anyone think Iran would attack Israel. Gads even if they get nuclear weapons, a rational move for any country constantly being threatened by 2 other countries that have nuclear weapons (US & Israel), the weapons would be for defensive purposes.
I do agree with you that Krauthammer is off-his-rocker. Why would he be starting this little particular campaign just now? Worried maybe that once some reasonably sane, if not rational, individual gets into the WH that he'll simply he considered the screwball fanatic he is and he'd like to make sure that individuals hands are tied.
I'm so glad he left us and you down there have him. Thank heavens he got that Commonwealth scholarship and got out of town.
April 11, 2008 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rosenberg the loon is calling everyone else crazy.
Apparently he hasn't read Glenn Loury - right here on TPM - on Obama, Wright, Farrakhan, and attitudes in the black community towards Jews and Palestinians.
But, of course, Rosenberg knows more about the black community than Loury. Rosenberg knows more about everything than anyone. TPM continues to publish him because he generates hits and controversy, because a good portion of the "progressive" (read lunatic) Left is even more out to lunch than he is, and perhaps because Josh Marshall agrees with him.
Too bad because he does not add credibility to anyone.
April 11, 2008 1:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, Solomon...
You're such a sad, sad case. What, exactly, does this have to do with Obama, Wright, Farrakhan or the monolithic attitudes that you were told the Black Community holds towards Jews and Palestinians? Is it even remotely relevant? Is what M.J. knows about the Black Community relative to anyone else even remotely relevant? Does your comment have ANYTHING to do with this post?
Are you actually saying you would side with Chas Krauthammer over M.J.? WHYLO?
April 11, 2008 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
@ondioline
What, exactly, does this have to do with Obama, Wright, Farrakhan or the monolithic attitudes that you were told the Black Community holds towards Jews and Palestinians?
Look at the thread list. Rosenberg's two articles are a third the way down. In the first he refers to a "crazy right-wing blogger", in the second to crazy Krauthammer. I chose to reply to his characterizations in the second. That too difficult for you?
Nobody (except you) said anything about "monolithic" black attitudes, only that certain attitudes were very, very common, that they were held by Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan, their followers and many others, and that Obama - despite his caveats and explanations - was and is close to them. That too difficult for you?
April 11, 2008 1:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
raving non-sequiturs. Do you stand on the street talking to the stop sign also.
April 11, 2008 5:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Any thoughts on Kruthammer?
April 11, 2008 8:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mr Rosenberg, I just couldn't read all of this article. You start by saying that Krauthammer is out of his mind and promotes evil. You call him a complete hater. Were it not for your constant and baseless attacks against Hillary Clinton I would be interested in what you have to say about this guy. But your credibility with me is shot. I'm sure you don't care. But I thought I'd point it out anyway, because I think you should consider your readers.
April 11, 2008 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wrong, Otto. I care what you think. I don't care what the trolls think.
I'm sorry you are offended by my writings on Hillary. What can I tell you? I get equally pissed off by criticism of Obama.
That's politics.
But I'll sure as hell vote for her if she's nominate. With enthusiasm.
April 11, 2008 2:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
@Rosenberg
Take a look at an Atlas, a good one, one with actual distances in miles or kilometres and tables of fundamental statistics. Notice
1) How small Israel is
2) The demographic trends in both Israel and the Arab countries. Both populations are growing rapidly, the Arabs especially so (Gaza has one of the highest birthrates in the world).
3) Increasing resource scarcity, particularly as regards water and arable land.
Given the above there are only 3 possible outcomes in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict
1) The Arabs are expelled from the West Bank/Gaza and perhaps neighboring territories.
2) The Jews are expelled from Israel.
3) Arabs and Jews unite into one nation which honors the rights of both.
Now consider the history of these two groups, their tolerance of each other...and of minorities.
Do I have to spell it out? You're - AT BEST - a complete idiot. What makes you especially sad is your recent claim to special empathy by virtue of your wife's heritage. Can't you do basic arithmetic? 6 million lost in the Holocaust, half of Jewry at the time. That means virtually every Askenazy Jew - and many Sephardic and Mizrahi Jews - are related to someone who died in the gas chambers or concentration camps. Your heritage proves only one thing; that you are twice an idiot - incapable of learning from experience.
April 11, 2008 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're attacking the messenger.
Can you really defend Charlie Kraut's column? Of course not.
And about your last paragraph - go to Abe Foxman with that and see how if he thinks it's funny.
April 11, 2008 6:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
@KingElvis
You're attacking the messenger
So who's message is Rosenberg bearing? Moses'? God's? Don't be ridiculous. Rosenberg is the author of that tripe.
Can you really defend Charlie Kraut's column? Of course not
No...but not for any reason you imagine.
The American people will never agree to such a guarantee. Most of the "progressive" Left would be more than happy to sacrifice every Jew they could get their hands on for a few sheckels and a good night's sleep.
Nor would the Israelis believe it if it was somehow miraculously enacted. If they think for a minute that Iran is going nuclear, and can't be prevented from doing so, they'll use their arsenal to destroy the oil fields... and every Muslim within range. That's all the deterrence they need. The Israelis are supposed to have almost 400 nuclear weapons - more than enough.
about your last paragraph - go to Abe Foxman and see if he thinks it's funny
You think my last paragraph was funny...or meant to be funny?
April 11, 2008 8:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's Krauthamer so worried about?
We can sell a few mothball-headed boomers (SSBNs) to the Israelis and they can deploy their own MAD strategy. Problem solved.
April 12, 2008 12:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
kruthammer has been making shit-house rats look sane by comparison for years
so what's new ???
April 12, 2008 4:18 AM | Reply | Permalink