Mamdani didn’t stop Netanyahu from speaking at the UN after all
Not that he ever could have done so. But Mamdani’s bluster was that he would arrest Netanyahu if he dared to set foot in the city.
Here’s an excerpt from Netanyahu’s speech that I think encapsulates the irony of the situation:
Devastating Iran’s nuclear facilities was hard. It was very hard to do. But for me, it was one of the easiest decisions I’ve ever had to make as prime minister. Because if we hadn’t done it, we’d all be dead.
Now, you want to hear the ultimate irony?In defending itself, Israel is also defending many of the countries whose delegates just left this hall!
In fact, I want you to know that many of their leaders even thank us privately for taking out Iran’s nukes.
There is a great deal of charade in the Middle East, and a great deal of destructive maneuvering at the UN. Netanyahu is telling the truth, but it won’t matter.
The UN has been an anti-Israel force for a long long time, which is also ironic because it was a UN vote that helped establish the modern state of Israel. For the history-challenged (which is an ever-increasing number of people), see this:
Throughout 1947, the United Nations Special Commission on Palestine examined the Palestinian question and recommended the partition of Palestine into a Jewish and an Arab state. On November 29, 1947 the United Nations adopted Resolution 181 (also known as the Partition Resolution) that would divide Great Britain’s former Palestinian mandate into Jewish and Arab states in May 1948 when the British mandate was scheduled to end.
Other ironies: it is Hamas and other terrorist groups who would dearly love to genocide the Israelis/Jews if they could, and 10/7 was a step in that direction with greater ambitions than it achieved. It is Israel that has neither wanted to commit genocide nor taken steps to do so, and yet it is Israel that is widely accused of genocide. It is Hamas and other terrorists groups that purposely kill babies and other children in Israel as well as purposely putting their own children in harm’s way, whereas Israel tries not to kill children but sometimes does so as collateral damage, and yet it is the Israelis who are accused of targeting children.
The latest salvo in the “child-killer” rhetoric is this pernicious propaganda film:
Israel’s culture minister has called for the Oscar-winning Israeli co-directors of Naza, a documentary that accuses the Israeli army of mass civilian killings in Gaza, to be stripped of their citizenship over “treason against the state”.
Named for the Hebrew military acronym for collateral damage, the film speaks to 24 unidentified Israeli military and intelligence officers who outlined the AI-powered targeting systems used by the Israeli army to bombard Gaza in the war triggered by the Hamas-led attack on 7 October 2023.
Twenty-four unidentified Israeli military and intelligence officers. Hey, can I be one, too?
More:
How does a film reliant on masked “witnesses,” unverified testimonials, and zero cross-examination command instant international acclaim?
You know how – it fits the preferred agenda of the Israel-haters and Jew-haters and Netanyahu-haters around the world, and in particular the left but hardly limited to it.
Co-director Yuval Abraham claimed the film was created to “spark a public discussion about the Israeli government’s actions.” But if the genuine goal is to spark a meaningful, honest conversation, you must present full context and transparent information. You must give people the complete picture so they can make an informed judgment. True dialogue requires context, nuanced expert analysis, and an honest acknowledgment of the existential security threats Israel faces. …
Much of the Western public exhibits an insatiable appetite for any narrative that delegitimizes or criminalizes the State of Israel, or its IDF. We see this cycle play out constantly: initial, unverified claims or inflated casualty figures following an Israeli strike make front-page headlines and send thousands into the streets in protest. Days later, when independent reviews reveal the original reporting was false or misleading, the retraction is buried in quiet, footnote-sized corrections that nobody reads. The damage is already done. Without verifiable identity, specific context, or cross-examination, some audiences trust and applaud the authors’ narrative on faith.
None of this is to claim that any military, including the IDF, operates flawlessly or above critique. Evaluating military ethics in asymmetric warfare is agonizingly complex.
How do you calculate proportionality when fighting an enemy that deliberately embeds itself behind its own civilian population? When terrorist cells operate out of homes, schools, and hospitals, using human shields, every military response carries tragic potential costs. But judging operations strictly by their heartbreaking outcomes—while entirely ignoring the explicit strategy of human shielding that causes them—presents a fundamentally distorted view of reality.
Distorting reality in the interests of a narrative is the point. What’s more, it has been very very successful.
There. Fixed it.
Here is a list of the country delegates who walked out ( compiled by the Israelis). Interesting that the only European country I can see is Ireland. Also, the Russia and China delegates did not walk out.
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/full-list-of-countries-to-walk-out-of-netanyahu-speech-at-united-nations-409984/
I was a student at the National War College 15 years after the war ended for the USA in Vietnam. My fellow students from the military services (about 1/4 of the student body is drawn from civilian agencies) were virtually all VN veterans, and the look back at that conflict spent a lot of energy on dissecting asymmetric warfare: when one side is vastly outgunned by the other but still fights effectively.
Hamas has been very effective at asymmetric warfare, and has successfully enlisted the MSM from all over the world in supporting them. That doesn’t surprise me. What does surprise me is the number of Americans they have successfully enlisted, including a fair number of Jews, or at least protestors who present themselves as “Jews for Palestine.” Even accepting the possibility that a large number are false flag operatives, I find the number surprising. Hamas has been very successful at ginning up this asymmetry. I’m surprised Israel has not been as effective, especially after their pager caper. I attribute part of this — maybe most — to antisemitism, which appears to be increasing in Europe and the USA.
Netanyahu did a masterful job at the UN, but he needs to address the asymmetric warfare.
There were a few other Europeans who walked out, notably Spain (no surprise) along with North Macedonia and tiny San Marino. But notably missing from the list was the “good Somalia”, Somaliland.
In my last post “San Marino” was originally autocorrected to “Dan Marino”. Or maybe my fat fingers hit D instead of S but funny nonetheless.
The UN walkout is symbolic of the very peculiar and seemingly rather sudden worldwide spread of anti-semitism. Scary. Maybe the US should welcome Jews on easy visas; they have a lot of creative energy, which many of us lack, and would support.
All the shitty and inconsequencial countries walked out of Netanyahu’s speech. Places like Mauritania and Comoros. One vote each, just like the US. The only reason for the US to stay in the UN is its veto power in the oddly-named Security Council. Comoros is a trivial Pacific conglomeration of three African islands, headquartered at Nioumachaoua.
Re: Netanyahu at UN
I was worried about large violent protests. That’s certainly what Mamdani was hoping to inspire.
There were protests. A hundred people were detained. But pretty mild, all things considered.
_________________________
–“Susan Sarandon, Hannah Einbinder among more than 100 detained during anti-Netanyahu protest outside UN”
https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/susan-sarandon-hannah-einbinder-among-080959000.html
_________________________
Shame on Susan Sarandon.
Susan, whose 15 minutes expired decades ago?
Lots of fine actors are able to believe whatever is emotionally satisfying.
The Dems like tough talk against dictators and bad actors, after the criminals have committed crimes. But easy policies before, and little actual punishment afterwoads. Reps like the tough talk, but want tough action, too. Trump is often tough, tho also often easy, on the talking, but usually tough against the enemies he wants to be tough against. (I think he’s not tough enough against Russia, but also suspect his easier policy is better in the long term. No corrupt Ukraine faction deserves huge US support; but Russia invaded.) Trump is talking easy flattery with Xi, but his actions remain tougher than any other recent President.
The Muslim countries that walked out, publicly against Israel, are likely more able to act kinda like Dems. Tough in public words against Israel, while slowly increasing trade & reducing problems.
Israel is doing fine in winning the war & killing the worst guys.
Israel is lousy about accepting the need to become the benign occupation temporary dictator of Gaza. They don’t want to do that dirty job. Gaza needs to be ruled, with quite a heavy hand, to be more like Singapore. Israel’s failure to take up this burden is partly why Hamas was able to oppress all the 2 million in Gaza.
The genocide charge against Israel is weak, but many smart folk believe it. And will continue to believe it until Gaza stops being a shithole.
The speech by Bibi was good, with great ideals:
“The belief in one God. The sanctity of life. The rule of law. Our eternal quest for peace. Our eternal quest for justice.”
Sadly, life is unfair AND many folk think unfairness is an injustice that a justice system, and a just system, will convert into justice.
Unfairness is outside of any justice system.
But reality oppresses us all, tho in lesser & greater amounts, especially low for Americans.