Lawfare Daily: Benjamin Wittes on Israel, Gaza, and Implications for U.S. Foreign and Domestic Po... 

What an incredibly interesting conversation.

According to Wittes, South Africa has filed the equivalent of a frivolous lawsuit. I’m not sure which opinion is more offensive, this one or the Stormy Daniels one.

Best thing I've heard on the subject.

This is an important discussion and Wittes does an excellent job navigating it - I admit I haven’t paid as close attention to it while walking my dog and will have to give it another listen!

If more people in power would engage like Ben is talking then perhaps some progress can be made. I seriously disagree with some of his particulars and his biases but im sure he'd say the same. But at least there'd be sincere dialog

Oh good. This is needed. Thanks, Ben.

The origin of conflict should matter, as well. It is not the entirety of the issie but is extremely important. Examine the manner in which Israel was established by Europeans on Arab lamd. The way the people of Palestine habe been ignored or downplayed in negotiations. The way the Palestinian people have been moved one way then another all subject to Israel's whims. They are like the Native Americans in this respect and they are fighting back in the ways avaliable when confronting a massively overwhelming force. Now, build the discussion from there and work honestly for a mutual solution. Israel is too established to be removed. Its crimes will be largely overlooked. But until confronted there will always be resistance to occupation and subjugation.

Whether Israel has a legal or moral right to proceed as it has against Gaza, according to Wittes, is orthogonal to the fact that no society will sit still when attacked. In this position, Wittes appears to follow the school of international relations called _offensive realism_. While one applauds Wittes application of an important theory, Wittes also seems to be an adherent to another theory-the Henry Ford theory of history. Ford is often cited as saying, “History is bunk.” For Wittes, history begins on October 7 with Hamas’ attack on Israeli territory. The historical record of imperialism and of Zionism’s colonial settler variant of empire, is conveniently left out of Wittes attempt to justify the barbarity of the Israeli attack on Gaza. Most glaring, however, is Wittes’ failure to apply offensive realism to Palestinians. The failure is typical of delicate liberal Zionists who cannot imagine Israel as anything other than a somewhat flawed, yet normal state, simply trying to get on with its life while assailed unjustly by Hamas. Wittes’ failure is not a failure shared by less delicate Zionists. They neither neglect to apply the realist school to Palestinian aspirations nor do they follow Ford’s approach to history. Zionist writings dating from the early years (expressed by writers such as Ze’ev Jabotinsky in his 1923 work, “The Iron Wall,”) are clear: no indigenous people, including Palestinians, will willingly accept the theft of their land and destruction of their society by colonial outsiders. Indigenous people will fight back, the real Zionists understood then and understand now. They understand, that for Zionism to succeed in its project, harsh, cruel, and barbaric measures against the Palestinian people are required. What we see in the current bloodletting, is an escalation and a perhaps an attempt at the final solution much desired and demanded by the Zionist project from its inception.