Nation Review Attacks Gen. Petraeus As Anti-Israel & Jeff Goldberg Unveils Himself

[Jefferson23]

By M.J. Rosenberg - April 8, 2010, 1:27PM

Andrew McCarthy, a far right columnist at National Review Online, has had it with General David Petraeus and his defenders.

He is particularly furious with Max Boot, the neocon columnist and Senior Fellow at the Council of Foreign Relations, for denying that Petraeus is anti-Israel.

McCarthy thinks that Boot is just a Petraeus admirer who cannot face the facts.

Petraeus is echoing the narrative peddled incessantly by leftists in the government he serves and by Islamists in the countries where he works. According to that narrative, Israel's plight is not a struggle for survival.... on the contrary, this view holds, it is the result of a mere political conflict. It could be resolved, so the theory goes, if only Israel weren't so intransigent....
I'm with McCarthy. Petraeus clearly believes that supporting Netanyahu is bad for America and specifically for American men and women in uniform. But I don't think that makes him anti-Israel. In fact, by using his position to oppose Netanyahu's policies, he is helping Israel and America both. .


remiander: http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/04/08/nation_review_attacks_gen_petraeus_as_anti-israel/

[OHdem10]

1. Will Fox join the McCarthy bandwagaon???

[Jefferson23]

4. It appears Fox is focusing on Iran, at least by some accounts:

Kristol: ‘Better’ for US to attack Iran than if Israel did

By David Edwards and Gavin Dahl
Sunday, April 4th, 2010 -- 12:17 pm

The Obama administration should be seriously considering a strike on Iran, according to neoconservative Fox News contributor Bill Kristol.

An Israeli Deputy Defense Minister said last week that he expected Israel would have to attack Iran within a year. Kristol believes it would be better for the US to attack first.

"I think we have to have a credible threat of force and the preparation to use force against Iran. It would be much better if we used force against -- to delay the Iranian nuclear program than if Israel did and there is no evidence that the US government is being at all serious about the use force there," Kristol told Fox News' Chris Wallace Sunday.

Nina Easton, also appearing on the Fox News Sunday panel, quickly rebuked Kristol. "Use of force. You say that so blithely as if use of force -- what happens to next day after the use of force?" she asked. "I think it behooves us to get the international community together. You have to have sanctions and you have to have a clear threat of force."

http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0404/kristol-us-strike-on-iran-israeli-strike/

[azurnoir]

2. the only surprise is that it took a whole 2 weeks

to come up with this.

As to this piece from the article

'There's nothing wrong with outreach to Muslims. Executed intelligently, such outreach may be quite useful. The problem is that the same eagerness for outreach has not been matched by an eagerness to counter Islamic extremism. Outreach and counter-radicalization are not the same thing, and we have not seen this Administration meet this latter challenge with the same vigor." In other words, only talk to them brandishing a stick. Does that apply to Israel too?

the real problem is that most Israel supporters do not see the current government as extremist, they may mouth and mumble about the settlers occasionally but that's about it

[NavyDavy]

3. I thought Gen Petraeus was the right wings poster boy? my how things

change