Get FREE NRO Newsletters

 

June 11 Issue  |  Subscribe  |  Renew


New on NRO . . .
Close
Chris Christie Leads on Israel
He believes what he says, and says what he means.

By Dennis Prager


Archive Latest RSS Send

Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey in Westfield, N.J., February 8, 2012


Text  

New Jersey governor Chris Christie addressed the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) last week. In the few words reported by The Weekly Standard, he said just about everything one needs to know about Israel, about its relationship with the U.S., and about American political leadership:

America should stand by its friends and its democratic allies, even, and sometimes especially, when it’s unpopular to do so.

It may not be fashionable in some of the chancelleries, the foreign ministries, and salons around the world to talk about why America stands with Israel — but that’s no excuse not to be saying, and saying it loudly, I admire Israel for the enemies it has made.

Advertisement

Americans and Israelis believe — we know deep in our bones — that if the Islamic Republic of Iran acquired a nuclear-weapons capability, it will be an existential threat to Israel, to America, and to world civilization itself.

A threat to Israel is a threat to America. A threat to the Israeli way of life is a threat to the American way of life. Not only for here in America, but for all the nations that emulate our democracy or are trying to emulate our democracy around the world.

Stopping Iran from acquiring nuclear-weapons capability must be a top priority of the United States of America. Any president, Republican or Democrat, who allows such a thing to occur on his watch would be acting in a way that is profoundly against the national security interests of the United States and the security interests of our friends in Israel.

In a few words, a New Jersey governor, generally identified only with domestic issues, made the case for why America should support Israel — and why Iran must not be allowed to obtain nuclear weapons — at least as clearly and eloquently as (and perhaps more so than) any major political figure in America today.

Let’s review:

1) America should stand by its friends and democratic allies especially when it is unpopular to do so. This is a challenge to the Democratic president, Barack Obama, and to Republican congressman Ron Paul and his supporters. Since becoming president, Mr. Obama has visited Turkey, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Indonesia, and Afghanistan, just to name the Muslim nations out of the 30 countries he has visited. The president has not visited Israel, America’s greatest ally in the Middle East, not to mention the only country in that part of the world that shares America’s values. Meanwhile Ron Paul regards standing by allies as a waste of money, and certainly a waste of lives, if military intervention is ever called for.

2) It is indeed not fashionable in the chancelleries, foreign ministries, and salons around the world to talk about why America stands with Israel. That is why this comment alone singles Christie out as a potential national and world leader: He believes it is necessary to say what is right despite what the U.S. State Department, Le Monde, the New York Times, and the United Nations think. The first rule of American leadership is to not give a damn what any of those think about you. Wanting to be highly regarded by any of those institutions has led too many Republicans astray.

3) For those who have trouble distinguishing good guys from bad guys — for example, most universities and the Left generally — Christie offers a Cliffs Notes summary: Just look at who one’s — in this case Israel’s — enemies are. Any country that Hamas, Hezbollah, the Muslim Brotherhood, and Ahmadinejad hate must be one morally great place.

4) Christie makes the case for preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons as clear as can be: That country poses an existential threat first to Israel, and secondarily to America and the West. The greatest mistake — ultimately a suicidal one — that good non-Jews make is to dismiss Jew-hatred (known by the euphemism of “anti-Semitism”) as the Jews’ problem. Had the Western world not dismissed Hitler and Nazism as primarily a Jewish problem, 50 million non-Jews would not have been killed between 1939 and 1945. Jew-haters, like the above-mentioned Islamist successors to the Nazis, hate all that is and all who are decent and good. We turn our attention from Iran’s nuclear ambitions at our great peril. Chris Christie knows this. Ron Paul does not. Does Barack Obama?

Even if Chris Christie could be recruited at this late date, I do not believe that I know enough about him to yearn that he be the Republican presidential nominee. But aside from reinforcing already positive feelings about him, these few remarks on Israel and the world should be a lesson to the candidates who are in the race.

And the lesson is this: Say what you believe. Americans are willing vote for people they differ with on some issues, even important ones. But they have to believe that you believe what you say and that what you say comes from a set of deeply held beliefs.

Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist. He may be contacted through his website, dennisprager.com.

Text  

You Might Also Like...

Krauthammer: Echoes of ’67: Israel Unites

May: The Real Palestinian Refugee Problem

Glyn: Peter Beinart’s Zionism

Interview: The Shadow War

Pipes: The Israeli Arab Paradox

Krauthammer: Obama’s First Priority: Stop Israel



COMMENTS   41

EXPAND  

   02/14/12 05:05

Dennis Prager wrote: A threat to Israel is a threat to America. A threat to the Israeli way of life is a threat to the American way of life.

Nonsense. Ally or no ally, there's no practical reason to believe that a country the size of New Jersey is all that important to the well-being of the United States. Or at least Mr. Prager has given no persuasive reason to think Israel is any more integral to the American way of life than any other democratic country.

Israel is perfectly capable of defending itself and should be encouraged to do so, but not with American blood or treasure.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/14/12 16:17

Actually, the words you cited were from the governor of NJ.

Israel is no more able to defend itself completely today as France was in 1940.

The difference is your willingness, as an American citizen, to stand with a nation comprised mostly of Jews, as opposed to one in Europe comprised mostly of Christians.

Thankfully, among non-Jews in America, you're in the minority.

But, Ron Paul's supporters would comfortably fit within the majority at a Cindy Sheehan Pep Rally.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/14/12 18:08

I don't think that he said anything about being willing to defend France in 1940, so I'm not sure there is any kind of "difference" that you speak of.

Furthermore, I think I'd go with LiberalFreeZone on one issue: Israel *is* likely able to take care of itself in terms of military spending. It greased combinations of Arab armies in 1967 with (as far as I know) zero US military aid. And in those days, they still face full blown invasion from three directions. That's hardly the case today.

Israel today spends the equivalent of about 30 billion dollars a year on defense (see: External Link ). Of the three billion we send them a year in total aid, I think that only about 1.8 billion if military aid. Replacing that would cost Israel less than an additional percentage point of GDP. Hardly an insignificant burden, but not back-breaking either.

They probably benefit more from our diplomatic support, but even there, their enemies hardly seem terribly strong. The US didn't even need to cast its veto in the Security Council when Abbas went to the UN for membership. Based on that, it doesn't seem that the UN was really anxious to do that much for the Palestinians (either that, or the UN did really want to grant them membership, but Obama quietly moved mountains for the Israelis to prevent that...in which case, Obama's committment to Israel suddenly looks a lot less suspect).

Disclaimer: I am disagreeing with you on your statement that Israel can't defend herself. That should not be taken as an argument that we SHOULD cut of Israeli aid. Those are two different questions, and on the latter one, I am an emphatic "no". Palestinians won't even sit down at the peace table with the Israelis. Given that, we should make it clear that we back Israel.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/14/12 06:07

Israel, not United States, is Iran's enemy. An Iran with nuclear weapons will disrupt Israel's cruel and outrageously exercised Mideast hegemony. All our Mideast wars have been against our interests, yet successfully advocated by the Jewish state. Again against our interests, Israel has involved us in increasingly overt operations against Iran. Spies and American military drones in Iranian airspace are the most recent revelations. Since before 9/11, American soldiers have been dying for the Jewish state. We are at war. Who did this to us? Israel, AIPAC, the One Percent and traitorous monied Israel Firsters have corrupted our politicians and entire electoral system. Justice and the future of America demand that they be prosecuted and jailed.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/14/12 12:46

Apparently you've missed 1979 - Present.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
MattB
   02/14/12 14:18

John,

What cruel things has Isreal done? Please enumerate examples of the hegemony, and justify your answers.

Could you please define who the "One Percent" are? I am a supporter of Isreal, and by the definitions taht have been touted in popular "movements" lately, certainly not one of the 1%. How do you define them?

You'd like no more wars- so would I. However, when war comes to you, you must meet it if you are to preserve your republic. Iran has stated that they consider us an enemy. They would like to annihilate Isreal, and the US if given the chance.

Should we let them?

For that matter, do you believe we should be involved in international relations or politics in any way? Why? Do we have legitimate interestests outside of our borders? If so, do we need to take the long view to protect our intersts, and our national security?

Have you thought through these questions, or are you reacting with (justifiable) disgust to the wars and rumors of wars in our world today? They are real, and our government is tasked to pay attention. Our friendships and alliances must be nurtured and supported, for mutual benefit.

I don't purport that we jump heedlessly into war or military action. However, given the number of failed attempts at diplomacy (Iran rejected or ignored), and the increasing threat verbalized by Iran against us and against our allies, we must consider how and when to act. It is for the good of many.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/14/12 16:10

What, no Cyclon B this time around, hot shot?

Just put all the Jews in jail, with no fancy shower system?

You've softened some since 1940.

And, I suppose it was Israel's fault when our good friend Iran took our citizens hostage in 1979?

I advise you stand up, and let your brain breathe.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Gmarks
   02/15/12 10:49

there was no cyclon B the FIRST time around... the propaganda machine has been working over time since the 30's

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/14/12 17:53

As I read your screed I was imagining your buddies at OWS standing over your shoulder and saying, "yeah,man. Those hypocrites won't even know what hit them man. You tell 'em dude. Anarchy rules! Anarchy rules! Hey man, dont bogart that. Are you guys going to the Rage Against show? I need another beer. I'm bored man. Hey, where's Chuck? Oh there he is. Whatcha writing man?"

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/15/12 17:41

Who ya gonna believe? JohnWV or your lying ears? Iran has been openly antagonistic, and covertly attackng us since before Pat Buchanan lost all his hair. They don't call us the "Great Satan" for nothing. Remember Preying Mantis? Khobar Towers? Argentina? The recent plot on a Saudi diplomat (would have blown up a restaurant and killed hundreds). Sure - that's all Israel's fault. If we follow JohnWV's advice, the entire mideast will blow up, with Venezuela and North Korea getting in some rib kicks on the west, just for fun.

captcha: "hobby-horse" as in, "get off your high isolationist horse and smell the coffee."

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/14/12 06:09

NO MORE WARS! Subservience to grandiose Israeli aspirations and the military industrial complex is ruining America. NO MORE WARS!

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Andy Wallace
   02/14/12 14:31

You need to take your head out of the sand. Iran wants weapons that will allow it to attack any country on earth. It has said it wants to destroy America. So your advice is roughly this: Cross our fingers and really, really hope they were just kidding?

Turns out you cannot hide from the world. Your delusions that we can just try to isolate ourselves is foolish.

Iran hating us has nothing to do with us and our culture. It has everything to do with them and the hate created by their world view.

But even if you do not agree with that you just have to listen to them. They themselves has said to the world they want to destroy us. Why would you not believe them?

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/14/12 15:47

subservience to grandiose Israeli aspirations and the military industrial complex?

What grandiose Israeli aspirations? The aspiration to exist, free from the threat of nuclear destruction?

NO MORE STUPID ASSED SLOGANS!!! Subservience to stupidity and insular thought is ruining America. NO MORE STUPID ASSED SLOGANS!

Not sure the MIC will benefit much from an Israeli strike against Iran, unless they are in the market for radioactive cobalt glass.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Gmarks
   02/15/12 12:51

uh, no

aspire to murder and incarcerate their neighbors who are not J's

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   JRapp
   02/14/12 16:01

-Number of Americans who died fighting in in Wars for South Korea : ~50,000

-Number of Americans who died fighting in wars for Europe: ~500,000

-Number of Americans who died fighting in wars for Israel: 0

-Number of Internet postings from Ron Paul supporters complaining about Americans who died in European and South Asian Wars: 0

-Number of Internet postings from Ron Paul supporters complaining about Americans dying for Israel even though no American soldiers have ever died for Israel: ∞ (Too many to count).

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Dave B.
   02/14/12 20:06
fred kleeson
   02/14/12 19:51

I think that's what Neville Chamberlain said in 1939...

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/14/12 09:04

And yet the man endorses Romney.
How can he be so Right on Israel,
yet so Left on the GOP?

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/14/12 09:51

I don't hold Christie's Romney endorsement against him, but I do hold against him his mystifying judicial nominations of a couple of weeks ago. After allowing the appointment of one liberal judge to lapse, and after making explicit promises to appoint strict constructionists, he turned around and nominated men he knew nothing about other than that they were "diverse." Now it turns out that one of them takes an extreme left-wing activist view of the New Jersey Constitution and wants to impose same-sex "marriage" on New Jersey. Christie didn't even vet him. I think the man has lost his mind.

Sorry for the digression, but I don't trust anything Christie says anymore.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/14/12 10:05

I'm a Christie fan. I'm not sure how realistic his chances are of ever being president, but he'd get my vote if he ran. I'm pleased he didn't jump in the ring this time as he needs to gain some executive experience and have time to really study the issues one has to be familiar with as a presidential candidate.

And sadly, I realize that the many in my party who are so enamored of Christie now will turn their backs on him eventually. He will be tarred with the brush of "northeastern moderate." And he will be accused of the ultimate sin - pragmatism - from which there is apparently no redemption.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Load More Comments

Add a Comment

Already Registered? Log In Here.


The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.


* Designates a required field.
© National Review Online 2012
All Rights Reserved.
Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital

Gift Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital
NR Apps
iPhone/iPad
Android

NRO Apps
iPhone
Support Us
Donate
Media Kit
Contact