Obviously the NYT editors do not think it is “pointless” to discuss land grabs when the Russians do it. It is only pointless when the Israelis do it.
It is also interesting that the editorial board suggests in what direction the subject should be changed: towards the “major international challenge” of Ukraine. I am not sure the board thought this suggestion through. After all, what is the core Western complaint about happenings in Ukraine? It is the Russian land grab in the Crimea as well as the alleged threat of more such moves in eastern Ukraine. Yet just how different is Russian behaviour in this regard from that of Israel in the West Bank and Golan Heights? Obviously the NYT editors do not think it is “pointless” to discuss land grabs when the Russians do it. It is only pointless when the Israelis do it.
The article is right to chastise The New York Times; however, Lawrence Davidson (the author) is missing some points too. He posed the question: "...just how different is Russian behaviour in this regard from that of Israel in the West Bank and Golan Heights?" Well, vastly.
Russia has the backing of the vast majority of Crimeans, who voted, via a free and fair process, to join Russia. On the other hand, is there even one Palestinian Arab in Gaza or the West Bank who wants Jewish rule over them? The difference couldn't be more striking and relevant.
The US administration definitely shouldn't move on to simply ignoring Zionist crimes against Palestine. What should happen is that the US, NATO, etc., stop all of the Cold Warrior crap and rather focus on real problems, such as Zionist/Israeli/Jewish war crimes and illegal occupations and control ...!
Europeans of mixed extraction (hardly purely Jewish or even close to it; many without a trace of, or with barely a trace of, ancient Israelite DNA) literally horned their way into Palestine and simply took over, took vast portions of the land by force of arms. They did that after the land grabbing by Germany of WWII had been so roundly decried.
The Zionist point the finger at the US and it's expansion into Native American/American Indian lands, but who's saying that the US government was correct in its treatment of the Indians? I'm not. Are American Indians second-class citizens forced under law to agree in writing that the United States of America, founded by Anglo-Saxons (which it was), is an Anglo-Saxon state and always will be? No. The United States is called a melting pot. What is Israel called, and why the double standard?
Oh, the Zionists say that Jews have been persecuted so much down through the ages that they must have a "Jewish" state at the expense of the Palestinians, whom many of the Zionists have claimed, and still do, aren't really a people, that the place where Israel now sits was "a land without a people for a people without a land." Old maps and other materials and data, however, show quite clearly that Palestine was inhabited by tens of thousands and hundreds of thousands of Palestinian Arabs before the Zionists started moving in. Fact: The ethnic cleansing of Palestine is vastly better documented than what the Zionists milk as the "Holocaust," as if what happened to the Europeans claiming Israelite extraction (even if the Zionists were telling the whole truth, which they are not) is worst than what happened at the hands of the Bolsheviks (extremely top-heavy with "Jews") and the Maoists.
I doubt that anywhere near the number of Jews died at the hands of the Nazis than non-Jews died at the hands of the Bolsheviks via forced starvation via forced collectivization of Kulak farmlands and hard-labor camps and fake psychiatric institutions all designed to eliminate any resistance to the dictatorship of those Bolsheviks (it was not a democracy). It was a one-party, totalitarian, brutal dictatorship largely conceived by, and run by, "Jews."
Imagine the White Americans claiming that the area now constituting the United States was uninhabited before the settlers moved there and that there were no American Indian nations. Yet we put up with this garbage from the lying Zionists while the US administration guns for Vladimir Putin instead. Why? The answer is Zionism and Neoconservatism (I'm not aware of any neocons who aren't Zionists — Jewish, self-styled Christian, or otherwise) have occupied the US government and is largely determining the foreign policy of the US against the best interests of the American people as a whole and the best interests of the entire planet.
The Zionists want control of Russia. There's no doubt about it. They'll take it via US proxy.
The US administration is going along because the US administration is stupid, has historically been ethnically prejudiced against Russians (and Slavic peoples in general whom they consider generally inferior, a remnant idea left over from the British Empire and various Germanic tendencies), and remains religiously bigoted against Russian Orthodox Christianity.
The US would be vastly better off partnering with the Russian people than with the war-criminal Zionists who've set up an Apartheid system in Palestine.