...
National Threats

“Anti-Semitism is best understood as a virus. It has no logic. Jews were hated because they were rich and because they were poor; because they were capitalists and because they were communists; because they held tenaciously to an ancient faith and because they were rootless cosmopolitans, believing nothing. Hate needs no logic. It is a sickness of the soul.”

Jonathan Sacks, English Orthodox rabbi, philosopher, theologian, and author

“If anyone had told us in 1945 that there are certain battles we’ll have to fight again we wouldn’t have believed it. Racism, anti-Semitism, starvation of children and, who would have believed that? At least I was convinced then, naively, that at least something happened in history that, because of myself, certain things cannot happen again.”

Elie Wiesel, Romanian-born American writer, professor, political activist, Nobel laureate, and Holocaust survivor

“One of the chief tasks of any dialogue with the Gentile world is to prove that the distinction between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism is not a distinction at all.”

Abba Eban, Israeli diplomat and politician, and a scholar of the Arabic and Hebrew languages.

“The growing tide of anti-Semitism shocks the conscious of everyone who values freedom, and the ugly, hateful acts particularly stain the character of democracies where liberty and religious freedom are supposed to be respected.”

Mike Ferguson, American Actor


Introduction Israel and the Existential Threat and The United States in Internal Disorder

National Threats

National Threats considers how two nations face existential threats to existence. Israel facing terrorist attacks by groups dedicated to the absolute destruction of the State of Israel and, if possible, the genocidal extermination of all Jews, wherever they may reside, and the United States facing an existential threat to Constitutional government from divisions within the US population itself. One nation is harassed from the outside while the other is self-destructing. What inspired this piece was the US criticism of the Israeli prosecution of their war for survival in Gaza while the United States cannot solve its internal divisions.

National Threats: Israel’s Unyielding Defense


Israel Faces Existential Threats

In the tumultuous Middle East, Israel stands as a beacon of unwavering strength. Faced with relentless threats from groups like Hamas, Israel’s leaders, military, and citizens form a united front. The nation comprehends that these aren’t just regional conflicts; they are battles for survival. 

National Threats: Israel’s Vigilance

Israel’s responses to external threats are marked by a combination of strategic precision and resolute determination. The nation’s leaders understand the gravity of the situation, and the military executes operations with the precision of a surgeon, emphasizing the seriousness of the existential threat.

Hamas as an Existential Threat


National Threats: Hamas: Persistent Threat to Israel


Hamas, an extremist group fueled by radical ideologies, continues to pose a grave danger to Israel’s very existence. The threat isn’t confined to military skirmishes; it’s deeply rooted in an ideological struggle for dominance in the region.

Ideological Struggle


Beyond the immediate military confrontations, the conflict with Hamas represents an enduring ideological struggle. Israel’s battle isn’t merely against physical attacks but against an ideology that challenges its right to exist. The stakes are higher than land; they are existential.

National Threats: Israel’s Existence at Stake


The conflict in Gaza transcends regional tensions; it’s a battle for survival. Israel’s measured yet forceful responses underscore the gravity of the situation. Each military action isn’t just a strategic move; it’s a defense against a looming existential threat to the sovereign State of Israel.

Existential Challenge


Every rocket fired from Gaza isn’t just a military provocation; it’s a potential threat to the very existence of the Israeli state. The conflict underscores the delicate balance between self-defense and the preservation of a nation’s sovereignty.

National Threats: US Congress and Constitutional Crisis


Congressional Inaction on Trump’s Threats


On the other side of the globe, the United States grapples with an internal crisis, where Congress hesitates to act against a different kind of existential threat. Former President Donald Trump freely disseminates lies, casting doubt on the very foundations of the constitutional government.

National Threats: Constitutional Government at Risk


The inertia within the US Congress exposes the fragility of the American constitutional system. The reluctance to act against a leader spreading misinformation puts democratic principles at risk. The threat isn’t external; it’s a corrosive erosion from within.

Constitutional Government at Risk


The inaction of the US Congress lays bare the vulnerability of the American constitutional system. The refusal to counter a leader spreading misinformation jeopardizes the foundational principles of democracy, putting the very essence of the constitutional government at risk.

National Threats: Unchecked Deception


Unchecked lies and half-truths by a former president erode trust in institutions, threatening the democratic process. The power of misinformation should not be underestimated; it can be as destructive as any external threat faced by a nation.

Trump’s Unchecked Lies


National Threats: Trump’s Falsehoods Threaten Democracy


In stark contrast to Israel’s decisive actions, the US grapples with a leadership vacuum where lies and half-truths run rampant. The consequences of such unchecked deception are far-reaching, with potential long-term damage to the nation’s political and social fabric.

Lies Undermining Democracy


The unbridled spread of falsehoods by a former president undermines the democratic process. The unchecked propagation of misinformation weakens the foundations of democracy, creating a volatile environment with far-reaching consequences.

Propaganda Media and Public Apathy


Media Propaganda Fuels Division


Adding fuel to the fire is the role of media, unintentionally or intentionally perpetuating propaganda-driven narratives. This exacerbates the division within American society, further weakening the nation’s ability to respond cohesively to internal threats.

National Threats: Divisive Media


Media outlets, unintentionally or not, contribute to a polarized environment. The propagation of biased narratives fuels division, making it challenging for the public to discern facts from fiction.

Apathetic Public: Ignoring the Warning Signs


Compounding the issue is the apathy of the American public. Indifference to the erosion of democratic values, possibly due to fatigue or desensitization, creates a breeding ground for further destabilization.

Indifference to Threats


A sizable portion of the American public appears indifferent to the erosion of democratic values. Whether due to fatigue or desensitization, this indifference creates a perilous atmosphere, leaving the nation susceptible to internal decay.

Contrasting Public Responses


Israeli Resolve vs American Apathy


While Israel’s population is acutely aware of the existential threats they face, the American public seems disengaged. The responsibility to safeguard democracy lies not only with political leaders but also with every citizen. It’s a call to action against apathy and misinformation.

National Threats: Collective Responsibility


In times of crisis, citizens play a pivotal role. Whether in Israel or the United States, collective responsibility is paramount. The contrasting responses serve as a stark reminder that the fate of a nation ultimately rests in the hands of its people.

Citizens’ Responsibility in Times of Crisis


In times of crisis, citizens play a crucial role. Whether in Israel or the United States, collective responsibility is paramount. The contrast in responses serves as a stark reminder that the fate of a nation ultimately rests in the hands of its people.

Responsibility for Democracy


The fate of democracy isn’t solely in the hands of political leaders. Every citizen bears the responsibility to uphold democratic values, fostering a resilient society capable of withstanding internal and external threats.

Conclusion: Two Nations, Two Response


Israel’s Vigilance vs. America’s Complacency


The divergent paths taken by Israel and the United States in the face of existential threats underscore the critical importance of collective action. One nation stands vigilant, defending its existence with determination, while the other grapples with internal strife, highlighting the urgent need for unity and resilience. The contrast serves as a poignant reminder that the preservation of a nation’s essence requires unwavering commitment and active participation from its citizens.

Finally, I am calling upon American politicians at all levels to stop leveling threats against Israel’s response to the existential threat posed by Hamas and other Arab radical terrorist groups like Hezbollah until you can clean up your own house and the divisions caused by the divisive politics that accumulate the stench of petrified fear of the disintegration of our national values.

By Politics-as-Usual

Roger is a retired Professor of language and literacy. Over the past 15 years since his retirement, Roger has kept busy with reading, writing, and creating landscape photographs. In this time of National crisis, as Fascist ideas and policies are being introduced to the American people and ignored by the Mainstream Press, he decided to stand up and be counted as a Progressive American with some ideas that should be shared with as many people who care to read and/or participate in discusssions of these issues. He doesn't ask anyone to agree with his point of view, but if entering the conversation he demands civility. No conspiracy theories, no wild accusations, no threats, no disrespect will be tolerated. Roger monitors all comments and email communication. That is the only rule for entering the conversation. One may persuade, argue for a different point of view, or toss out something that has not been discussed so long as the tone remains part of a civil discussion. Only then can we find common ground and meaningful democratic change.

Leave a Reply