Will U.S. Jews Stand With Israel - Or Obama?,Jonathan Braun

American Jews overwhelmingly voted for Barack Obama, the Candidate of Change, despite credible warnings and ample evidence that he would obsessively seek to create a Palestinian state at Israel's expense and "engage" nuclear-arming, Islamist Iran.

After four months of Change, Obama's support in the Jewish community seems rock solid. Besides, many Jews say, Obama's appointment of two Jews to key White House positions - Rahm Emanuel as chief of staff and David Axelrod as presidential senior adviser - proves Obama is OK for Israel. So what if the meeting with Netanyahu didn't go as well as first advertised? Bibi's a right-winger, anyway. Under Obama, there was a kosher Passover Seder in the White House. Progress! Hope! Change!

Hmm .The head-spinning, stomach-turning developments make this lifelong Jewish supporter of Israel think Hitler made two big blunders in his quest for world domination. He attacked the Soviet Union - and he did not invite American Jewish leaders to a catered kosher lunch in Berlin before the war.

Seriously. Had Hitler been able to hide his fanatical hatred of Jews for only a few hours, he might have been able to mobilize liberal American Jewish opinion in favor of a policy of appeasement toward Nazi Germany - perhaps, even, a formal pledge of non-interference in Germany's internal affairs.

Admittedly, a free kosher lunch might not have been enough to win over the so-called Jewish leaders. The Nazi madman probably would have had to appoint a Jewish adviser (on Jewish affairs, say) to accomplish his aim.

A high-level Jewish adviser - yes! That would have worked wonders for the Fuhrer. The Jewish leaders would have returned home to reassure their concerned fellow Jews and the American media that Hitler had no intention of starting a war, regardless of Germany's ominous rearmament and military buildup; that he was instead interested in forging a closer relationship between Germany and the United States, one that could possibly even lead to an alliance of some sort to preserve peace in Europe.

As for "the Jewish Problem," the American Jewish bigwigs would have said that while some Jews were indeed suffering in Germany, there really was room for progress - quietly, of course, behind the scenes. Quiet, patient, principled diplomacy - that's the ticket!

And so it would have gone. Dialogue and diplomacy are the answers, the Jewish leaders would have said; no sanctions, no big, public protests - they would only make matters worse for Germany's Jews and needlessly antagonize the Nazis. No talk of armed intervention or future conflict, heaven forbid.

The impact of their meeting with Herr Hitler and call for engagement and dialogue would have been instant (or what passed for instant in the time before television and the Internet). Overnight, the brave minority warning of a rising, imperialist threat across the ocean would have been marginalized -maybe forever. Following the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, there could have been a crucial decision by the U.S. government to avoid or delay declaring war on Germany as well as Japan, perhaps accompanied by a presidential speech reminding the public of Germany's great contributions to Western civilization and culture and to the shaping of American society.

Though the anti-Semitic rabble - the foot soldiers in armbands and jackboots and white sheets - would have been appalled by Hitler's meeting with Jewish leaders, the Fuhrer's more sophisticated American supporters and sympathizers would have understood his diabolically clever move. Influential isolationists and fascists - the Pat Buchanans of that era - would have laughed all the way to the next America First or German American Bund (or Silver Shirts, or Black Legion, or Ku Klux Klan) rally.

The Roger Cohen of that day - there is always a Roger Cohen whenever and wherever Jewish communities are threatened with annihilation and persecution - would surely have written a series of articles for The New York Times about Jewish conditions in Germany being not so bad after all, despite the beatings and racial laws, the persecution and the humiliation, the incessant anti-Semitic propaganda. (In fact, the liberal Jewish columnist Walter Lippmann wrote approvingly of Hitler in the late 1920s, advising his readers that the Nazi leader would "moderate" his views upon achieving power.)

Obama is no Hitler. Obviously. God help us if that were the case. But Obama's policies and actions are giving new Hitlers - the leaders of Islamist Iran - time to develop nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles capable of destroying Israel and bringing America to its knees.

In other words, Obama's appeasement of Iran and betrayal of Israel is effectively helping to prepare the ground for a new Holocaust and a new world war.

And American Jews and Jewish organizations - seemingly slavishly bound to a Democratic Party with a left wing that now views the establishment of Israel as a mistake - are going along for the ride. American Jewish voters overwhelmingly chose Obama over John McCain, a proven friend of Israel, and they don't seem at all ready to jump ship. They are not even close to the exit ramp.

What will it take for American Jews to stand up and be counted? Would a call by Obama for a Palestinian capital in Jerusalem open their eyes? Probably not. In contrast with bible-believing Christians and observant Jews, liberal Jews are fashionably forsaking Israel's capital. Strong support for Israel is so yesterday ... so ... Bush/Cheney.

The time is fast approaching for American Jewry to decide between loyalty to a political party that bears no resemblance to that which their parents and grandparents adored for generations and their professed love of Israel whose security, along with the security of the United States, is being undermined by everything Obama is presently doing, has done, and plans to do.

With whom do you stand, American Jews - America and Israel or Obama and the Democratic Party?

Jonathan Braun is a former managing editor of the Jewish Week, recipient of the Jabotinsky Centennial Citation, longtime editorial board member of Midstream, and the founding editor and publisher of China Confidential (chinaconfidential.blogspot.com) where a slightly different version of this article first appeared.

Read Comments (9)

Will U.S. Jews Stand With Israel - Or Obama? , Jonathan Braun

Yasher koach!
Date 04:06, 06-3, 09

Yasher koach!

Liberal Jews are Dumb
Date 10:06, 06-3, 09

Even though I do not agree with the author's obvious contempt for Pat Buchanan,I do think he makes the excellent point that liberal Jews do not even know what is best for Israel. On top of that they certainly are clueless as to what is best for America as evidenced by recent election stats.. The obvious truth is that leftist Je2s are politically dumber than a bag of rocks.O f that we can be most convinced...Robert M. Simon, Sparta,TN

POLITICAL FASHIONISTAS
Date 01:06, 06-5, 09

The Jews of ancient Greece became more interested in being Greek than Jewish. They shed traditional Jewish dress, and assimilated themselves in every way. Jews in each new age have done similarly. Let's face it, most American Jews want to be more "American" than Jewish, and for ethnic minorities in the U.S., that means being "hip," "fashionable" and politically liberal. When will they change? When they see the fangs of their liberal-goyim friends revealed. As Rabbi Kahane said, "If you want to know what America is, go into a bar, and as the schnaps goes in, listen to what comes out."

Minor correction
Date 06:06, 06-5, 09

After the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour, the US did NOT declare war on Germany. Germany first declared war on the US. We wouldn't have had to worry about the reactions of pro-German elements.

Bogus metaphors, bogus dichotomies
Date 04:06, 06-8, 09

Sir,

Your comparison of Obama policy on Iran to appeasement of Hitler is as bogus as the choice between America & Israel versus Obama and the Democrats.

The European Jews of the 1930s didn't have a homeland and their enemy had all the hardware. Dont go saying 1933 is directly comparable to 2009. Its not.

Now, Israel has plenty of hardware and also a homeland. We might be able to bomb the Palestinians, Egyptians, Jordanians and Lebanese into voting the right way, but it aint gonna work with the Iranians. They're too big, too far away, and way too crazy.

I trust CIA vet Robert Baer when he says we gotta deal with Iran like we would deal with an armed and dangerous psychopath. Talk about the weather, change the subject, and get him to put the gun down nice and slowly.

And talk to a few Persian Americans - they're all goddam sick of the Iranian leadership, and say Iranian citizens feel the same. The best way to steal Iranian thunder is the Two State Solution.

CORRECTION
Date 04:06, 06-14, 09

You say, "Would a call by Obama for a Palestinian capital in Jerusalem open their eyes?"

But Obama has ALREADY promised the "Palestinian" Arabs a state (reichlet) WITH Jerusalem as it's capital!
www[dot]wnd[dot]com/index.php?pageId=99664
So, no, I guess even that isn't enough to raise them from...., uh, wake them up.

Another Important Reference
Date 05:06, 06-14, 09

Since I can't leave the URL, you'll have to Google it...

"Anti Semites for Obama - Farrakhan compares candidate to Mohammed" (from "MILITANT ISLAM MONITOR[dot]ORG")

Israel Matzav is another excellent resource, as well.

Thank you, Jewish Press, for trying to alert American Jews to what is going on!

Where they will stand may depend on where they live now
Date 10:07, 07-5, 09

The Jews of NY & the rest of the East coast elites have made their choice - Liberalism is their Golden Calf. They have turned their backs on Israel, and shut their eyes to history.

While we may be a smaller Jewish population in Texas & the southern states, the attitude here is markedly different. We stand with Israel. Frankly my Christian friends have more love for Israel than my own family back east.

But seriously, what did anyone think Obama was learning in that "church" for 20 years about "them Jews" (as Rev. Wright calls us)? Didn't we all know this was coming, didn't we?

Hysteria always sells
Date 03:07, 07-11, 09

I will not address the writer's angry screed regarding Obama's policies toward Iran, other than to point out that eight years of Bush/Cheney did not appear to work. How long does one pursue a losing policy, just because it sounds righteous? Branding any attempt to talk to one's enemies Appeasement, and Obama as Chamberlain may be rhetorically satisfying but it is only that. Regarding Israel, the writer says "thank god" Obama is not Hitler. Yet 80% of his article insinuates Obama policies will result in another Holocaust. This is another cheap, emotional stunt: trot out the Holocaust instead of raising serious, point-by-point objections. Which Obama policies? Trying to talk to Iran? Demanding that Israel stop building settlements? How exactly? On the basis of what evidence? This sort of demagoguery is meant to appeal to the gut, perhaps even the heart, but certainly not brain or the mind. To dispute the writer's contentions on this level would be tantamount to arguing against motherhood. In his entire column the writer does not point out one specific policy that sets Obama apart from the mainstream debate taking place within Israel itself today -- and he conveniently ignores the fact that successive Israeli leaders have modified their views on what it would take to at least have a chance of achieving peace (not a guarantee, but a chance). Think about it: a succession of Israeli leaders from the right and the left, from Menachem Begin to Yitzhak Rabin to Shimon Peres to Ehud Barak to Ariel Sharon to Ehud Olmert to Tzipi Livni to -- dare I suggest? -- Bibi Netanyahu have all evolved in their thinking from their original stated points of view. Are all of these people traitors? For that matter, has Obama said anything more radical than many of today's Israeli leaders? Not really. Only it's easier to trot out the specter of the Holocaust (and thus cheapen the true horror of the Holocaust) than to rigorously examine and honestly debate differences in policy. But then, hysteria always is an easy sell.