Walt > Woodshed

John Judis just shreds Stephen Walt’s – endlessly repeated – claim that Israel was a key factor in the decision to invade Iraq.

I’ll point out that in my reading of their book, their entire argument is as thinly reasoned (I can’t say that they misrepresent sources as baldly because I haven’t looked). It’s all a part of the “just make s**t up” school of political argument that we’re all suffering under these days.

2 thoughts on “Walt > Woodshed”

  1. Here’s an interesting blog by Eric Fingerhut – “Who’s really using the term ‘anti-semite’?”:http://thefingerman.blogspot.com/2010/02/jewish-fact-check-6-whos-really-using.html – which points out that a lot of people are really eager to brag that they’ve been branded as anti-Semites for criticizing Zionists/Likudniks/neo-conservatives/lobbyists of non-Gentile extraction.

    “Now check out Walt’s response to the Judis piece.”:http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/02/16/bush_blair_and_iraq_round_ii_a_reply_to_john_judis

    To his credit, Judis is mostly interested in evidence and he doesn’t stoop to the same level of character assassination that some of our critics do.

    Darn, Judis neglected to call Walt an anti-Semite. As if this were a surprising omission, given that Judis is criticizing Stephen M. Walt, “a realist in an ideological age”, and Judis is a you-know-what. It is to his credit that Judis rises above you-know-what, unlike some of those other you-know-whats.

    Nonetheless, the bottom line is that the United States would not be in Iraq today were it not for the influence of the Israel lobby – a loose coalition of groups and individuals that includes the neoconservatives – and no amount of dust-kicking can obscure that fact.

    So, we wouldn’t be in Iraq if it weren’t for the people who put us in Iraq. No kidding. On the one hand, Walt smears the accusation around – “a loose coalition of groups and individuals” – so as it make it sound a little less like a midnight cabal in a Prague cemetery, and on the other he ties them all up in a package he calls the Israel lobby.

    Of course, if there were any people in favor of the invasion (about 60% of the public in 2003) who could not be accurately called lobbyists for Israel, or if there were pro-Israel people who opposed the invasion, then “the Israel lobby” would be an inaccurate label.

    Walt isn’t bothered by such logic. Who got us into Iraq? The Israel lobby. Who is the Israel lobby? The people who got us into Iraq. Quod erat demonstrandum.

  2. I remember reading somewhere (was it Hersh?) that Israel was actually deeply concerned about our interest in Iraq. Some misguided fear about us making the country even worse than it already was.

    Those crazy Israelis!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.