Andrew Sullivan (@sullydish): Goldberg On Netanyahu: Bluffing?
“And it’s from this Olympian height that Goldblog will not even deign to review the content of Peter Beinart’s new book challenging the internal contradictions of Goldberg et al:
And to be completely blunt, I’m not that interested in debating Peter’s new book, which I’ve just finished reading, because I find his recounting of recent Middle East history one-sided and filled with errors and omissions. The Middle East crisis is complicated, except in Peter’s telling. It’s hard to argue with Peter’s work precisely because there’s so much missing.
This is the classic, condescending “You Don’t Get The Complexity” bullshit he has used on countless others when he is ever faced with actually taking a stand on the relentless settlement and de facto annexation of the West Bank, with all its hideous moral and human consequences – not least to Israel’s soul and existence as a Jewish state. Notice the de haut en bas smear: “filled with errors and omissions” which he will not produce or cite so they can be aired and debated. He is above that. Presidents and prime ministers call him on the phone.”
Andrew, however, seems impervious to the influence of new information. Also, he’s more and more incapable of expressing nuanced understanding of Middle East politics, and he’s oblivious to the existence of anti-Semitism. (Peter’s book, alas, downplays the global hate campaign directed against Israel and Jews as well). All I can suggest to Peter is that he needs to find more allies who are not widely considered to be irrationally hostile to Israel. What he doesn’t need is people who fly into rages about Israel and its dark manipulation of world politics.”
. . . .
“P.S. Andrew makes no effort at all to render my views accurately.” . . . . “But as we’ve learned over time here at The Atlantic, there’s no arguing with the guy.”