Israel awaits an implosion as zionism fumbles

Despite a century having passed sinced the colonial construct of zionism was conceived, all indications reveal that the cracks in its ideology are getting bigger and wider.

Apart from exposing deep divisions amongst current zionist ideologues, these cracks have also disclosed that the patch-up going on today in Israel is exactly how panel beaters would describe a wrecked car: beyond repair!

<snip>

So while the looting of more Palestinian land continues, especially with the massive settlements being built in Occupied Jerusalem and the West Bank in the shadow of the concrete monstrosity known appropriately as the apartheid wall, Israel remains a deeply fractured society, incapable of sustaining the zionist project without the protection of Uncle Sam.

<snip>

The other apparition of "acceptance" flows from the misguided policies of corrupt Arab regimes ever willing to prostrate at the altar of zionism in exchange for remaining secure in their flimsy thrones. Israel remains equally misguided if it believes that "recognition" from dictators and tyrants will equate to legitimacy.

read more...

Hyperbole with a smattering of valid points here and there...

{Cantata Evangelica}

...and its a bust.

Stephen Pitt

Iqbal Jassat? Iqbal Jassat is Chairman of the South African-based Media Review Network (MRN), an advocacy group based in Pretoria, South Africa. (http://student.cs.ucc.ie/cs1064/jabowen/IPSC/php/authors.php?auid=3098) who has suggested " since all peace initiatives had failed and given Israeli intransigence, we ought to perhaps probe the South African experience as the only remaining route to follow. This route of course would necessitate the dismantlement of Israel as a Jewish state and its replacement with a unitary state –forfeiting the very notion of "two states for two nations". (http://www.collective-one-state.org/articles/iqbal-jassat.html) citing Ivor Chipkin.

He has also written "Sabra And Shatila - Does Anyone Care To Remember?" in Friends of Al-Aqsa (http://www.aqsa.org.uk/page_detail.aspx?id=42) – and a lot more.

First, read about M. King Hubbert's "Peak Oil" in either of Princeton Geology Professor Kenneth S. Deffeye's books (Beyond Oil : The View from Hubbert's Peak, Hubbert's Peak : The Impending World Oil Shortage), and in Cal Tech Professor David Goodstein's book (Out of Gas: The End of the Age of Oil) - or just click over to the "Peak Oil Group" on DU (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=266).

The "Implosion" in the Muslim lands of the ME will be far worse then the "Implosion" in the US or Israel -- the Arab lands will hurt because oil is their only cash crop, but the West (including Israel) can "get by" on Fischer-Tropsch synthetic fuels, photovoltaics, wind turbines, and non-proliferative nuclear power.

During the fifty years that the Muslim lands of the ME channeled their heart and soul into the revenge and political intrigues, Israel has developed pharmaceutical and medical electronics industries, water desalination industries, electronics industries, information technology industries, and alternative energy industries.

As we get past the "Peak" and slide down the "down side" - the temporary wealth that flows into the oil potentates will not go to the Saudi or Palestinian or Jordanian or Egyptian proletariat -- it will go to the richest of rich -- the "have mores."

That is social and political dynamite. And that implosion of Arab ME society will be catastrophic. And, that implosion will imperil not just Israel - but the West as we know it.

And the result of the implosion will be as catastrophic as the Spanish Inquisition or the Battle of Vienna.

I don't see how. For the sake of brevity I will ignore your conflating the "Arab World" with the ME. Those are two distinct entities. I would even further differentiate down to OPEC countries for discussions of imploding societies.

The profits flowing from the oil trade have always gone to a pitiful few in the ME in particular. Those with a death grip on those profits have done little to improve the lives of the vast majority. The implosion will be the end of the power of the oil-soaked tyrants and dictators. Those that are dirt-poor now will remain dirt-poor, but they will lose their ruling class for the most part. The upheaval, while unsettling, will not cause every single person in the ME to go through the drastic and radical changes that every person in the "West" will be forced to go through.

All of that being said, it has nothing at all to do with the original post, but it was not a completely useless tangent. Well, except for using the Spanish Inquisition and the Battle of Vienna as benchmarks for measuring modern catastrophes.

The real problem is:

"The profits flowing from the oil trade have always gone to a pitiful few in the ME in particular. Those with a death grip on those profits have done little to improve the lives of the vast majority."

And - as countries like Saudi Arabia pass their "Peak Oil" peak those with the death grip on the oil profits will throw even fewer crumbs to the dirt poor - who become become even poorer and more miserable.

a more chilling question - in the context of this thread is will oil peaking (see "Arab Lands Have Bigger Problems Then "Imploding Israel" at http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x88554#88562), be more destabilizing to whoever - the Arab Lands, the Muslim Lands, the ME, the World?.

Even the AlJeezra (quoted frequently with apparent approval in this forum) says Saudi Arabia's oil production may have peaked:
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/80C89E7E-1DE9-42BC-920B-91E5850FB067.htm

As oil prices remain above $45 a barrel, a major market mover has cast a worrying future prediction.

Energy investment banker Matthew Simmons, of Simmons & Co International, has been outspoken in his warnings about peak oil before. His new statement is his strongest yet, "we may have already passed peak oil".

The subject of peak oil, the point at which the world's finite supply of oil begins to decline, is a hot topic in the industry.

Arguments are commonplace over whether it will happen at all, when it will happen or whether it has already happened. Simmons, a Republican adviser to the Bush-Cheney energy plan, believes it "is the world's number one problem, far more serious than global warming".

<snip><

Saudi oil peaking?

Speaking exclusively to Aljazeera, Simmons came out with a statement that, if proven true over time, could herald by far the biggest energy crisis mankind has known.

"If Saudi Arabia have damaged their fields, accidentally or not, by overproducing them, then we may have already passed peak oil. Iran has certainly peaked, there is no way on Earth they can ever get back to their production of six million barrels per day (mbpd)."

Simmons believes Iran's oil production has also peaked

The technical term for damaging an oilfield by overproduction is rate sensitivity. In other words, if the oil is pulled out of the ground too fast, it damages the fragile geological structure of the field. This can make as much as 80% of the oil within the field unextractable. Of course, at the moment, virtually every producer is at full tilt. The most important among them is Saudi Arabia; their Gharwar field is the world's biggest.

The failure of ME policy and "A" cause (not "the" cause) of conflict in the ME has been the tragic failure of the "Oil States" in the region to diversify their economies and have an Islamic or ME or Arab Marshall Plan, and more particularly as one appender has appended

"The profits flowing from the oil trade have always gone to a pitiful few in the ME in particular. Those with a death grip on those profits have done little to improve the lives of the vast majority."

"

This is an example of misuse of God given, depleting resources.

I know some appenders will say this misuse of limited God given, depleting resources is somehow Israel's fault or Sharon's fault or Herzl's fault. I am listening.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/27/opinion/27friedman.html?

Geo-Greening by Example

<snip><

By doing nothing to lower U.S. oil consumption, we are financing both sides in the war on terrorism and strengthening the worst governments in the world. That is, we are financing the U.S. military with our tax dollars and we are financing the jihadists - and the Saudi, Sudanese and Iranian mosques and charities that support them - through our gasoline purchases. The oil boom is also entrenching the autocrats in Russia and Venezuela, which is becoming Castro's Cuba with oil**. By doing nothing to reduce U.S. oil consumption we are also setting up a global competition with China for energy resources, including right on our doorstep in Canada and Venezuela. Don't kid yourself: China's foreign policy today is very simple - holding on to Taiwan and looking for oil.

<snip><

All the elements of what I like to call a geo-green strategy are known:

We need a gasoline tax that would keep pump prices fixed at $4 a gallon, even if crude oil prices go down. At $4 a gallon (premium gasoline averages about $6 a gallon in Europe), we could change the car-buying habits of a large segment of the U.S. public, which would make it profitable for the car companies to convert more of their fleets to hybrid or ethanol engines, which over time could sharply reduce our oil consumption.

We need to start building nuclear power plants again. The new nuclear technology is safer and cleaner than ever. "The risks of climate change by continuing to rely on hydrocarbons are much greater than the risks of nuclear power," said Peter Schwartz, chairman of Global Business Network, a leading energy and strategy consulting firm. "Climate change is real and it poses a civilizational threat that transform the carrying capacity of the entire planet."

And we need some kind of carbon tax that would move more industries from coal to wind, hydro and solar power, or other, cleaner fuels. The revenue from these taxes would go to pay down the deficit and the reduction in oil imports would help to strengthen the dollar and defuse competition for energy with China.

It's smart geopolitics. It's smart fiscal policy. It is smart climate policy. Most of all - it's smart politics! Even evangelicals are speaking out about our need to protect God's green earth. "The Republican Party is much greener than George Bush or Dick Cheney," remarked Mr. Schwartz. "There is now a near convergence of support on the environmental issue. Look at how popular Schwarzenegger, a green Republican, is becoming because of what he has done on the environment in California."

<snip><

** - "...Venezuela, which is becoming Castro's Cuba with oil" --This is Bush-Cheney neocon, anti-Chavez, anti-Venezuela, pro-Oil Co spin.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Instead of constantly trying to belittle group X or blow them up, we could accept the fact that they are human beings with brains, talent, skills and muscles.

People could CREATE something instead of running around with guns and bomb kits and instead of committing homicide, suicide and all manner of atrocities in between, we could plant trees, work on water purification projects and improve our linguistic skills. Faith could be a matter of private strength instead of an excuse for public insanity.

What do you say? Should we GIVE IT A TRY ALREADY? Instead of licking our chops like a bunch of damn vultures, hoping somebody will croak?

The people of Israel are not exemplars of some creed or philosophy, and they are not simply going to "implode". Nor do they require any permission from ANYBODY to be legitimate. They're legitimate human beings, the real thing, deal with it.

Similarly, the people of the Arab world are not abstractions, either, limited to some meaningless existence simply because a sidewalk philosopher has declared it so.

There is no reason to suggest that, lacking oil, the Middle East can't develop itself IF it turns the swords into plowshares and deals with the real work of living. This does NOT include wiring children up with explosives and sending them to die, while taking the lives of innocents. Those who complain about the "apartheid wall" might consider the fact that said attacks have been drastically reduced by the wall. It's a symbol of what DOES NOT NEED TO BE, what shouldn't be, what we should all work to destroy.

A wall. When we should be building a highway. But the choice must be made - not to kill. To work TOGETHER, to learn, to make businesses, to create.

We all have the ability to learn, to grow, to make choices, and to reach out to one another and I truly believe it's about time we did so.

The world got along without oil or mass production for thousands of years; it's only been a couple of hundred years since we've been dependent upon it. Magnificent creations have been built with human hands since the beginning of our sojourn on this planet. We do not NEED oil; we do not NEED mass production. We DO need peace, mutual respect, education, advanced farming techniques, a clean environment, and sufficient fresh water. We DO need to get over the hairsplitting over "zionism" and respect the fact that the PEOPLE of Israel ARE legitimate, whatever ones philosophy, and have much to offer the Arab world and the world as a whole.

As do we ALL.

Personally I have more faith in humanity than to assume the Middle East - Israel - or the West for that matter - will implode, with or without oil - as long as people WANT to live, that is, and not continue on this spiral of craziness and war and hatred and anger and endless retribution.

Am I alone here in wishing the death-seeking rhetoric of the negative would please evolve into something more positive? Actions begin with ideas. So - here's an idea: reach out today to somebody you think is an enemy - and make a friend. Find an article about something POSITIVE to publish. Write something about people that shows our creativity, our ability to adapt, our ability to grow out of destructive patterns, our ability to love.

Who knows, it could be catching.

some people just "love to hate"....it gives them a purpose in life....so dont hold your breath about the death seeking rhetoric evolving anytime soon

except for what you say about the wall.

The problem with the wall is not its purpose and is irrelevant to its effectiveness in stopping suicide bombings. The problem with it is its location - in Palestinian territory currently occupied by Israel.

zionism is simply going through the most natural of evolutions...like any "new" philosphy put in to practice...2nd, 3rd, generations modify it to fit the new society model that has emerged.


hyperbol + ignorence + wishful thinking....(similar to the plan of intifada II)

I don't think the evolution of political Zionism has been all that natural. War isn't natural, and if the creation of the Israeli state had happened in different circumstances, I suspect Zionism would have evolved in a different, and what I would consider to be, a more natural way. One direction Zionism could continue to evolve in would be one where the occupation continues, Israel annexes most of the West Bank, and doesn't transfer Palestinians out of Israel and the West Bank. Zionism would still exist, but it'd be a form of Zionism that turns its back on liberal democracy. If the occupation ends and there is a fair and lasting solution of the conflict, I'd imagine that Zionism would evolve more slowly, but much of the warlike tinges in it would vanish. Anyway, have you read what Avraham Burg had to say in his article The End of Zionsim? It was an excellent article and an argument that no-one here should want to disagree with...

Violet...

is simply the "zionsim" as it was cannot be as things change. Much like the kibbutzim with their original values they have been modified to take in to account the needs and desires and subsequently the changing values of the newer generations. So too with the original zionist ideals...which ever way the path of israel took or takes, the original values of the beginning state could not possibly exist within the framework of a modern 21st century model....whether the "true zionist" is the settler in Hebron or the "refusnik" is up for grabs. In essence if there was once a meaning to the word, I would argue that, like in so many politically charged environments its meaning has now been corrupted so that it now means what ever the user wants it to mean.....

and a good article.....

The evolution of "Zionism" is like the evolution of "Liberalism" or "Conservatism" or "Progressivism" or "Populism."

I included "Populism" to the list because "Populism" has been a powerful force for good in some eras, a powerful force for silliness in others, and term for racism in still others.

My own bias is that the "Zionists" I grew up with was a Left Wing kibbutznik (in heart if not physically) who fled Russia with Czarist police on his tail, whose children were religious lefties and peaceniks and ACLUers and ADAers, whose grand children ran for the Knesset as "Peace Now" candidates, and whose great grand children were refusniks.

Not just about the article, but about how original values do change as time goes on. When it comes to Zionism, there's more than a few different forms of Zionism (traditional or mainstream, Revisionist, neo, post etc), some of which are at extremes to each other, that yr last sentence is one that I totally agree with...

Violet...