Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditThe Israeli invasion of Gaza, launched Saturday, might very well be George W. Bush's last and final war crime. For eight years, Bush has coupled unparalled ignorance of the Middle East with supreme arrogance. It is precisely that deadly combination of ignorance and arrogance that is on display now, as a politically motivated Israeli invasion of Gaza unfolds with the full support of the Bush administration.
In his weekly radio address, delivered as Israeli tanks and armor rumbled into the Gaza Strip, Bush declared:
"This recent outburst of violence was instigated by Hamas -- a Palestinian terrorist group supported by Iran and Syria that calls for Israel's destruction. ... Another one-way ceasefire that leads to rocket attacks on Israel is not acceptable. And promises from Hamas will not suffice -- there must be monitoring mechanisms in place to help ensure that smuggling of weapons to terrorist groups in Gaza comes to an end. I urge all parties to pressure Hamas to turn away from terror."
A more sweeping endorsement of Israel's action is hard to imagine. Writing in the Post, columnist Jim Hoagland, a reliable, neoconservative-allied scribbler, describes it this way:
"He did not just give Israel a green light to inflict as much damage as possible on Hamas once that radical movement foolishly renounced a six-month-old truce. Bush knocked down the traffic light post and waved the Israelis through the intersection."
Personally, I find Hamas despicable. It is a right-wing Islamist group with open terrorist inclinations, motivated by a fanciful notion that it can defeat Israel with its pinprick attacks. I've also written extensively, including in my book, Devil's Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam, how Israel created Hamas systematically and deliberately during the 1970s and 1980s, building up the Muslim Brotherhood and Ahmed Yassin's proto-Hamas movement as a counterweight to Fatah.
But Israel could easily have absorbed the rockets launched by Hamas, nearly all of which crash harmlessly in remote areas, if it had truly sought to work out an accommodation with the Palestinians. Most important, Israel could have endorsed and supported efforts by Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and others to create a lasting accord between Hamas and Fatah. Instead, Israel did the opposite, meeting each of Hamas' acts of violence with far greater violence of its own.
As I've written in this space earlier, the outcome of Israel's action is likely to be to strengthen, not weaken, Hamas. It will also have the following collateral effects: it will undermine the moderate wing of the Palestinian movement, perhaps fatally. It will weaken the government of Egypt, boosting the power of the radical-right Muslim Brotherhood there, to the point where Egypt's regime could collapse, with incalculable consequences. It will boost radicalism across the region, especially its Islamist variant, in Lebanon and Iraq in particular, and help Iran gain traction among otherwise unreceptive Arab populations.
Hamas is unlikely to seek a deal now. Having watched Israel blunder into Lebanon two years ago, in a futile effort to eradicate Hezbollah, only to see that movement emerge victorious and take control of part of Lebanon's own government, Hamas is not going to sue for peace. In that, they may be wrong, since Gaza is not Lebanon. In Gaza, Hamas has no access to resupply its armaments, and the territory on which it operates is extremely limited. So it is going to suffer severe military losses and vast casualties against the lethal Israeli Defense Forces.
Israel's objectives aren't clear. Israeli hawks, including Bibi Netanyahu -- appearing Sunday on CNN's Late Edition -- insist that Israel cannot stop its action until Hamas is utterly defeated, whatever that means. In the New York Times, two top Israeli leaders are quoted to the effect that Israel's objective is regime change and the elimination of Hamas. Foreign Minister Livni put it this way:
"There is no doubt that as long as Hamas controls Gaza, it is a problem for Israel, a problem for the Palestinians and a problem for the entire region."
And Haim Ramon, the vice premier, said:
"What I think we need to do is to reach a situation in which we do not allow Hamas to govern. That is the most important thing."
But in trying to eliminate Hamas, Israel will revive Hamas, which has been losing popularity dramatically until the current explosion. With Barack Obama maintaining his sphinx-like silence, it's the Bush-Cheney-Rice administration that remains in charge. They clearly have no intention of intervening, unless Israel gets into trouble and requests help. The Swampland blog at Time suggests that Obama's approach might be different from Bush's:
"No doubt, the Israelis want the operation to be over before the Obama inauguration--it's not neighborly to present your most important potential ally with a crisis at his moment of ascension. But it is very easy to get to stuck, and hurt, in alley-fighting. I hope that Israel is working as hard behind the scenes to arrange a quick cease fire as it is fighting on the ground. It would be nice if we had a President of the United States with the credibility and ingenuity to make it happen. Perhaps we soon will."
I'm not convinced. So far, at least, Obama has given no indication that he'd do anything different. I'd like to think he would. Some of his advisers, before the election, told me that they thought Obama would talk to Hamas. Let's hope so.
Share this article
Robert Dreyfuss
A chronicle of America's adventures in foreign policy and national security.
RSS
SPOKESMAN FOR US PRESIDENT-ELECT BARACK OBAMA
The president-elect is closely monitoring global events, including the situation in Gaza.
Source: BBC
Posted by OneVote at 01/04/2009 @ 1:12pm
Lost in the chaos are certain inescapable facts.
1) Hamas was freely elected in a UN-monitored Palestinian election, to a substantial majority in the Authority.
2) Israel responded to that election with incursions into Gaza and the West Bank to kidnap a sizable number of the resulting elected officials, who were imprisoned in Israel for the crime of being elected and not simultaneously being Israeli assets.
3) The Fatah component of the Palestinian Authority, largely seen by Palestinians as quislings serving Israel, and inarguably a minority after the election, engaged in a power struggle with Hamas that resulted in Hamas taking Gaza, Fatah taking the West Bank, and the collapse of the Palestinian Authority. Israel and the US immediately backed Fatah, their compliant proxy government.
4) Israel immediately imposed devastating and vicious economic sanctions on Gaza, an overt act of war on the people there and the legitimately elected Palestinian Authority.
5) After a long period of suffering under sanctions, with Israel barring international human rights inspectors from entering Gaza, and after an Israeli attack on Gaza that killed a hundred Palestinians, Hamas began firing rockets, its only option other than simply ceasing to exist.
6) With Israel's election in February imminent, the evil and monstrous Tzipi "There is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza" Livni laggning Netanyahu, and the power vacuum of a lame duck US president in his last days in office, Israel murderously attacked Gaza, the most densely populated region on Earth, from the air, and has now invaded on the ground, purely to get Livni elected.
There is an old rule - you must stand on your words. If you claim to be a proponent of democracy, you must respect democracy where it comes to exist.
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 1:22pm
The title of this article makes no sense. Even granting that what's going on in Gaza constitutes a war crime, and that Bush favors that rather than simply opposing Hamas, speech in favor of an existing war crime is not a war crime.
Posted by Thrawn at 01/04/2009 @ 1:24pm
We can never forget what Israel has done.
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 1:25pm
What Israel objects to is not "terrorism", for Israel employs "terrorism" writ large, and the Israeli regime whoever is running it benefits hugely every time an Arab group attacks a cafe. Israel objects to the audacity to resist occupation and abuse. Israel objects that the Palestinian people will not simply just go "away" leaving their land behind, or submit to being the untouchable class in an apartheid regime. In Israel, we have colonialism in an era in which colonialism can no longer exist.
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 1:31pm
<i>Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 1:22pm </i>
You're missing a key premise. Elections are not sufficient for democracy. Arguably, Hitler was put in power by legitimate democratic processes, but no one would seriously argue that the Nazi regime was democratic. To suggest that Hamas should be considered democratic is laughable.
Moreover, most of the other claims are at best interpretations of facts, not objective reportings of them.
One, I highly doubt that Hamas officials were arrested simply for "not being Israeli agents"; the fact that Hamas has a terrorist wing that is not strongly differentiated from its political wing makes your claim here highly dubious.
Two, why did the US back Fatah? If by "compliant proxy government" you mean "the only political entity of the two willing to accept Israel's right to exist"...then yes.
Three...I would contend, yes, that cutting funding off from the government was a bad idea, partly for the reason you suggest, but also partly because the best way to expose Hamas' utter inability to be anything other than a terrorist organization is to let them fail with no one else to blame.
Your cheerleading of Hamas here is deeply problematic. The only reason their existence would be threatened to begin with is because they have continued to refuse any peace with Israel so long as it exists. Even after Israel withdrew its settlers from the Gaza strip, that did nothing but give Hamas a new point from which to launch rockets. Whatever else we think about the situation in Israel, let's at least stop the "Hamas is just an innocent political party defending itself" nonsense.
Posted by Thrawn at 01/04/2009 @ 1:33pm
Also lost....
Daily rocket attacks from returned territories...
Bush last war crimes?
There are 2 Glaring examples that I would support Bush being brought up on charges and 1 for treason.
First war crimes..
1. Bush should be charged as an accomplice for not pursuing and arresting Clinton for letting Osama go without so much as a whimper and then begging off about legal authoroiy. Sounds like the Idiot, ALGORE.
2. Arrest Bush for derilection of duty in not protecting us by his not turning Western Pakistan into a nuclear testing zone and waste diposal site, or at the very least, a parking lot for the future.
For treason....
1. Arrest for not protecting our soverign borders... A clear constitutional mandate.
Posted by YourJomamma at 01/04/2009 @ 1:33pm
<i>Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 1:31pm </i>
Your "untouchable" claim doesn't make any sense either, because it requires you to simply pretend that the millions of Arab citizens in Israel either don't exist or aren't really treated like citizens. Neither of these is true.
Posted by Thrawn at 01/04/2009 @ 1:36pm
If it is true that this barbarity is taking place so that Tzipi Livni's poll numbers in her electoral bid rise - and rise they have, hugely, and any US war initiated by the US just weeks before a US national election would be referred to as "October Surprise" - then it is inarguably correct that upon her taking power, Tzipi Livni's Israeli "democracy" will be based upon the blood and suffering of the people of Gaza.
And to the extent that previous Israeli regimes have taken power after election-time war crimes against Palestinians, it is true that Israeli "democracy" has been based upon the blood and suffering of the people of Palestine.
What kind of savagery is this? To denounce as "terrorist" the entire male population of a region, and to bomb and murder it as a prop for Israel's internal political process? To furthermore attack and destroy an elected government authority because it does not agree with your aspirations in the region? Because it is the radicalized product of 40 years of wholesale abuse and horror?
What kind of hypocrisy is this, for Israel to declare its regime a shining "democracy" and "beacon of freedom"? A regime steeped in the blood of a people whose land was taken from them and given to Israel by the US and Britain, and whose land they continue to try to take from the Palestinians, even as they demand that Palestinians simply disappear into Jordan and Syria, or live as subjects of an apartheid regime?
I know injustice when I see it, and I say that we can never forget, never forget what Israel has done.
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 1:54pm
syfriendly: Since Gaza was turned over by Israel in 2005, over 6000 rockets have been launched by Hamas into Israel. If Gaza wants their supplies, I believe Egypt shares the southern border. The truth is no one in the area thinks Hamas is a force for good. Egypt doesn't support them, neither does Jordan or the West Bank. Only Iran and their flunkies support Hamas. Israel has every right to protect themselves from this terrorist organization. Another thing, talk about cowards, Hamas likes to hide among civilains hoping for casualties when Israel strikes. A common tactic of radical Islam, which believes in a cult of death instead of life - the fact that you support them says volumes.
Posted by pyeatte at 01/04/2009 @ 2:08pm
Posted by Thrawn at 01/04/2009 @ 1:36pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Really? 20% of the population of Israel is formally Arab and quite the untouchable class, witness the Jew-only roads, Jew-only job listings, the ridiculous level of wealth inequality between Jew and Arab living in Israel
And today? With the Hamas rockets falling, where are the bomb shelters for the 20% of the Israeli population that is Arab-Israeli and living in its own (separate) communities? They don't have any. Only the Jewish communities get the bomb shelters to protect against rockets.
And those rockets themselves? Did you know that more people have died in Israel as a result of traffic accidents than have been killed by Hamas rockets in 2008?
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 2:09pm
Did you know that more people have died in Israel as a result of traffic accidents than have been killed by Hamas rockets in 2008?
and what pray tell does that have to do with anything?
42,000 were killed on US roads in 2005, for instance. I guess that means the relatives of the over 4,000 dead US soldiers in Iraq should just stop squawking.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 2:16pm
Posted by pyeatte at 01/04/2009 @ 2:08pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Don't the Palestinians have every right to defend themselves from Israel? These people live in open-air concentration camps, unable to flee, and subject to random death from the Israeli military. They are economically strangled, have no basic rights in the eyes of Israel, have been largely abandoned by other Arab regimes - who in truth do not have a responsibility to take care of millions of refugees created by the US and Israel, their houses and orchards are bulldozed by Israel who then lets settlers in to take their land, they're killed by the settlers as well with no justice. Don't the Palestinians, who were simply expelled from their land after the US and Britain gave it to Western European religious fanatics via a legal act under the authority of an organization that at the time had no Arab membership, have every right to defend themselves?
Don't the Palestinians have a right to exist?
More people have been killed by Israeli-on-Israeli homicide in 2008 than Hamas rockets. Why has not Israel launched an air attack against the auto manufacturers, decrying an even worse terrorism than Hamas?
And what is terrorism, but the use of force to instill fear in the minds of a people, in order to change their political and social will? And in this definition of terrorism, are not the Israelis, with their assassinations, collective punishment, economic strangulation, shootings, home demolitions and all the rest, a regime that relies on terror to keep at bay a foe they created by simply taking as their own land that they were not given by those living on it?
This problem is not solvable without an equal redressing of the issues.
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 2:18pm
This title is way over-dramatized. While I don't agree with Bush's complacence in this issue I at the same time don't think this is a "war crime".
This war is extremely political. I disagree with most of the left and most of the right on this. This was Hamas' fault for being stupid enough to fire rockets at Israel right before their election. Israel has every right to step in and stop Hamas from firing rockets into it's borders which is why the United Nations has not done anything to stop Israel's actions despite worldwide protesting. Israel's motivation is politics. The current party can not look weak in the face of Hamas attacks.
However the problem is and where Israel is receiving the most rebuke is with the high cost to civilians of Israel's actions. While they are trying to limit casualties you can't fire rockets into an extremely small area populated by 1.5 million people and expect to get away without killing civilians. Attacking a mosque during afternoon prayer was reprehensible. Since the ground troops have moved in the death toll has risen and most of it has been civilian deaths.
The only way Israel is ever going to make itself safe is to stop fighting these people and start negotiating. Hamas said it started firing the rockets because Israel did not hold up it's end of the ceasefire. Instead of the opposition rejecting that wholesale maybe you should stop to examine the claim. There is some legitimacy in the argument that Israel helped to bring this down on itself because it is not truly committed to a peace effort because in order for peace to be brokered you have to be willing to give as much as you receive and Israel is not willing to commit 100% to peace efforts and nor is Hamas.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 01/04/2009 @ 2:18pm
This war is extremely political.
all wars are political.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 2:21pm
Also lost.... Daily rocket attacks from returned territories... Bush last war crimes? There are 2 Glaring examples that I would support Bush being brought up on charges and 1 for treason. First war crimes.. 1. Bush should be charged as an accomplice for not pursuing and arresting Clinton for letting Osama go without so much as a whimper and then begging off about legal authoroiy. Sounds like the Idiot, ALGORE. 2. Arrest Bush for derilection of duty in not protecting us by his not turning Western Pakistan into a nuclear testing zone and waste diposal site, or at the very least, a parking lot for the future. For treason.... 1. Arrest for not protecting our soverign borders... A clear constitutional mandate. Posted by YourJomamma at 01/04/2009 @ 1:33pm
Give me a break. Bush was fully briefed on the threat of Osama before he took office. He chose not to pursue him. If the crime is on anyone it is on him. I know you hate the left but your partisanship is glaring through absurdly.
"2. Arrest Bush for derilection of duty in not protecting us by his not turning Western Pakistan into a nuclear testing zone and waste diposal site, or at the very least, a parking lot for the future. For treason...."
Again this is just stupid. You can't drop a nuke in any part of the world now a days. Anyone who knows anything about international politics knows that this statement is simply absurd.
"1. Arrest for not protecting our soverign borders... A clear constitutional mandate."
This one's pretty funny because in fighting the terrorists he is trying to protect our sovereign borders. On top of that our sovereign borders are not being threatened. Is anyone trying to take land from America? I don't think so.
(continued)
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 01/04/2009 @ 2:22pm
Hamas said....
you believe what Hamas says?
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 2:22pm
If you are talking about illegal immigration then that has nothing to do with a threat to sovereign borders. and is in fact in no way treasonous. Just like coyotes are not brought up on charges of treason. So all of these examples of absurd all together.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 01/04/2009 @ 2:24pm
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 2:22pm
Instead of cherry picking phrases from my response why don't you actually respond to the whole of what I am saying.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 01/04/2009 @ 2:27pm
syfriendly: Those bomb shelters would not be necessary if the rockets were not falling. Blame Hamas for that, not Israel. I am sorry, but traffic accidents are an irrelevent issue since rockets are not "accidents". You seem to be saying "oh well, not many people are killed by the rockets so what is the big deal." The big deal is unprovoked firing of rockets could be construed as premeditated attempted murder. Of course once Israel starts to fight back it becomes war and all bets are off.
Posted by pyeatte at 01/04/2009 @ 2:36pm
Posted by pyeatte
yup.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 2:38pm
I am no fan of Hamas, but what would any of us do if our border was blockaded, newly elected officials arrested, negotiators assassinated and civilians killed? Israel broke the most recent ceasefire first. The firing of rockets may not be effective, but it is hardly unprovoked. And please, even reporters on Fox News acknowledge that Hamas' members are not hiding among the population of Gaza, they are PART of that population.
None of this is to indicate any support on my part for Hamas' program or strategies. Please follow the link below to a good column by Tariq Ali (originally published in the U.K.'s Guardian newspaper) that both holds Israel to account and points out the dead end that Hamas represents for the Palestinians.
From the ashes of Gaza: In the face of Israel's latest onslaught, the only option for Palestinian nationalism is to embrace a one-state solution
http://countercurrents.org/ali301208.htm
Posted by cka2nd at 01/04/2009 @ 2:42pm
syfriendly: Another thing, you claim that Arab citizens are treated in a shabby way by Israel. Perhaps this is true and perhaps it isn't. But, they do have the right to vote. Compare the treatment the muslim citizens receive in Israel with how Jews are treated in many, if not all, Islamic countries.
Posted by pyeatte at 01/04/2009 @ 2:46pm
arab Israelis also have seats in the parliament. any arab countries have a parliament, freely elected?
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 2:55pm
the only option for Palestinian nationalism is to embrace a one-state solution
this is even less likely than the two state solution.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 2:57pm
Syfriendly,
My guess is you are Palestinian, Arab of some sort, left over Nazi about 98 years old, a jew hater, or just plain biased....or worse..a nut.
...so to follow your logic "flow" about counting casualties... and JRs fine auto deaths example to clown you......
we are left to conclude from your logic flow that...
perhaps the Arabs in and out of Israel want to be martyrs?
Or Hamas wants them to be martyrs and forgot to tell them?
BTW.. I wonder if the Israeli Arabs would want to change places with Gaza Arabs,under any circumstances...
What would happen if Hamas, or any other group in Gaza, or West Bank, never fired 1 rocket over the next, say 5 years...what do you think the response in Israel would be?
What would the US response be if no rockets EVER fell on Israel from the ARAB side, for the next 5 years...?
What would the US response to Israel be if they did anything agressive in those 5 years to Palestine areas where no rockets fell...
which is the only sernario that has never been tried.
we may never know, because the crazys on the Gaza side to not want peace, they want victory...and will never be able to achieve it..so they will not allow those who just want a chance to live in peace and grow.. get a chance... in Gaza... or Israel.
Therefore, blame falls to Hamas. They are bringing death to their own peoples door step in the face of no possible military victory...and therefore it is a move only to cause shock and horror...IE...
terrorism.
And they are targeted to be wiped out...and should be.
Posted by YourJomamma at 01/04/2009 @ 3:00pm
Wow! Lots of interesting stuff over at http://www.counterpunch.org/
Posted by cka2nd at 01/04/2009 @ 3:01pm
Israel should not be in Gaza at all, they have no right to invade .....send in war planes, send in tanks and destroy anything and everything. Just who do they think they are that they can come and go as they please, do what they like and the US just sits idly by and watches. Bush condemning Hamas....well, what a surprise that was...when are we going to get a backbone and see Israel for what they are...bully boys who want to own the whole region and will stop at nothing to get it. Yet another stain on the US for condoning this repulsive action by Israel and the world will not forget....and we wonder why nobody likes us!!!
Posted by Caj at 01/04/2009 @ 3:09pm
From the ashes of Gaza: In the face of Israel's latest onslaught, the only option for Palestinian nationalism is to embrace a one-state solution
http://countercurrents.org/ali301208.htm
Posted by cka2nd at 01/04/2009 @ 2:42pm
This has been their policy for generations...hows it looking for them?
Seem all they generate are more ashes to me...and nothing rising again accept for lunatics begging to see paradise and taking innocents with them, who may not be so anxious to cash in on the virgins....
Posted by YourJomamma at 01/04/2009 @ 3:10pm
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 2:55pm | ignore this person | warn this person
The Palestinians had a freely elected (UN-monitored, unlike our elections here in the US) authority until Israel kidnapped the elected officials Israel disagreed with, encouraged a civil war within the two factions of the authority who were already at odds with each other, imposed sanctions (read as: "act of war", or "violation of Geneva Conventions") on the people living on the land under the faction Israel disapproved of, broke off a cease-fire with the faction it disagreed with by attacking Gaza and killing a hundred Palestinians, and then, in the pursuit of its own "democracy", launching a barbaric air and ground war against the people of Gaza.
It would seem that Israel is the biggest opponent of Arab democracy that ever existed; one formed right next door to them, and they brutally crushed it, as fast as they could.
Over 500 Palestnians dead in Gaza as of now, well over 2000 wounded. Every single security structure in Gaza has been destroyed, meaning that when these latest war crimes are done, assuming Israel leaves, there will be an absolute anarchy. Hospitals bombed, ambulances bombed, power plants bombed, every commercial operation in Gaza bombed, mosques bombed. This war of Israel's is nothing less than ethnic cleansing and places Israel, if that tawdry little "nation" of savages was not already there, into the annals of the most brutal and despicable countries on the Earth.
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 3:12pm
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 2:16pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Speaking of "squawking", the fact that four Israelis have died - since that despicable little country started its brutal and deeply illegal war on the people of Gaza - has been given more air time in the US than the vast death destruction inflicted on the people of Gaza? What does that tell us about ourselves? Our own warped standards?
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 3:14pm
Posted by syfriendly
if the Gaza arabs had the means, they would do the same to Israel. the Gaza arabs also knew that they were engaging in asymmetrical warfare.
I favor a cease fire, now.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 3:17pm
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 2:22pm | ignore this person | warn this person
On not believing statements from Hamas: You believe what Israel says, then?
To quote Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni two days ago: "There is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza." This statement is as bad and false as the worst excesses of Soviet-era propaganda. It is as brutal as some of the lies that emerged from fascist regimes through their various incarnations during the era of fascism.
You hear these words cross the lips of Israel's next head-of-state, and you continue to believe what Israel says?
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 3:18pm
is it not the heights of arrogance to label the enemy "a terrorist organization," while doing this to civilians:
http://muslimtv.magnify.net/video/ISRAEL-CARNAGE-CIVILIANS-CHILDR
Posted by darladoon at 01/04/2009 @ 3:20pm
On not believing statements from Hamas: You believe what Israel says, then?
this is a non sequitur. I said no such thing.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 3:20pm
syfriendly: Those bomb shelters would not be necessary if the rockets were not falling. Blame Hamas for that, not Israel. I am sorry, but traffic accidents are an irrelevent issue since rockets are not "accidents". You seem to be saying "oh well, not many people are killed by the rockets so what is the big deal." The big deal is unprovoked firing of rockets could be construed as premeditated attempted murder. Of course once Israel starts to fight back it becomes war and all bets are off. Posted by pyeatte at 01/04/2009 @ 2:36pm | ignore this person | warn this person
WHY DID THE ROCKETS GET FIRED? THIS ISSUE HAS A HISTORY LONGER THAN 6 MONTHS.
That may be your attention span limit, 6 months, but it is not the duration of the issue. Hamas did not even break the cease fire (another Israeli lie). Their rocket fire started up *after* the Israelis attacked Gaza and killed lots of Palestinians.
Furthermore, economic sanctions of the sort being imposed by Israel are an absolute act of war in the eyes of every civilized nation on Earth. Israel's part of the truce with Gaza was to lift the blockades, which they NEVER DID. Israel never came close to complying with the terms of its own cease-fire with Hamas.
Any governing power on the Earth with respond to total sanctions and military incursions against it, along with the demand that there can be no negotiation and that the governing power is simply to cede and disappear, with military force. Why it is that in your worldview this is only morally justified for Israel and its allies but not the Palestinians - who are among the most abused people on the Earth, a permanent refugee nation, a confined and prolonged Diaspora, is incomprehensible.
The scales of force visibly tilted towards Israel. The scales of justice? NO.
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 3:23pm
You hear these words cross the lips of Israel's next head-of-state,
I prefer to let Israel vote, before claiming to know who will be their next prime minister.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 3:23pm
Oh yes we will sure hear about the plight of the Israeli people all day long, but no one gives a toss about the Palestinian people and the carnage being done to them. When are we going to wake up and stop this ridiculous love affair with Israel as the rest of the world see us as bad as Israel as we condone eveything they do. Time is long overdue for our policy regarding Israel to be amended, they have had a free pass for too long.
Posted by Caj at 01/04/2009 @ 3:25pm
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 3:20pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Not a non-sequitur - you denounce Hamas alone for producing misinformation, while ignoring the Orwellian media management that Israel is engaged in WORLDWIDE, you implicitly condone and accept misinformation from Israel.
Look, I am sorry that you cannot recognize the criminality and brutality of Israel's war crimes and crimes against humanity. I am sorry that the spectre of the Hitler government in Germany - destroyed before "Israel" was created (by the US and Britain) - causes you to have an inability to bear witness to the evil being commited by the Israeli regime, because an organization like Hamas (WHICH THE ISRAELIS ORIGINALLY ENCOURAGED AND CREATED AS A WAY TO UNDERMINE FATAH!!!) is the last hope for the Palestinian people and fights with the only weapons it has. I am sorry for you.
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 3:26pm
the Palestinians - who are among the most abused people on the Earth, a permanent refugee nation, a confined and prolonged Diaspora,
all the arab nations are complicit in this. they haven't done shit for the "palestinians". they have warehoused them for generations, denying citizenship to the children of the refugees.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 3:26pm
"Seem all they generate are more ashes to me...and nothing rising again accept for lunatics begging to see paradise and taking innocents with them, who may not be so anxious to cash in on the virgins..."
and here we that have sheer, american stupidity and superficiality, perfectly encapsulated for all to read. it is after reading quotes such as these that i am ashamed to live in the same country as its author.
Posted by darladoon at 01/04/2009 @ 3:29pm
all the arab nations are complicit in this. they haven't done shit for the "palestinians". they have warehoused them for generations, denying citizenship to the children of the refugees. Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 3:26pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Is it the responsibility of the US to take in every economic refugee from Latin America? NO. Is it the responsibility of Syria and Jordan - both comparitively poor nations with burgeoning populations of their own - to take in millions of angry, displaced, radicalized refugees? Just so Israel can claim all this land for itself and a colonial victory? And when Syria or Iran or Saudi Arabia for example attempt to help out Palestinians in the only other way they can - THROUGH THE SAME MILITARY AID THE US GIVES TO ISRAEL - you condemn that. What help would you have the Arab nations do? They've already all but ruled out ever having real relationships with Israel until the plight of the Palestinians is addressed reasonably. What kind of mind state do you have, anyway? A nation of millions of refugees is created by a brutal, militarized apartheid regime, and you cannot once condemn the decades of atrocities this regime commits, and you think in response to a direct condemnation of these acts "Well, what are the *Arabs* doing to help out?" even as you condemn the military aid to Palestinians which is the SAME MILITARY AID THE US GIVES TO ISRAEL.
What kind of one-sides perspective can a man have? Again, I feel sorry for you.
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 3:30pm
no matter how you see it, one simply cannot deny the catastrophically disproportionate use of force by israel.
Posted by darladoon at 01/04/2009 @ 3:31pm
syfriendly: Another thing, you claim that Arab citizens are treated in a shabby way by Israel. Perhaps this is true and perhaps it isn't. But, they do have the right to vote. Compare the treatment the muslim citizens receive in Israel with how Jews are treated in many, if not all, Islamic countries. Posted by pyeatte at 01/04/2009 @ 2:46pm | ignore this person | warn this person
I'll even compare the treatment with the treatment that Muslims receive in the US.
The right to vote? For 20% of the population that is kept living in abject poverty? In an apartheid regime? What a joke? Do you believe these Arabs are the ones voting in Netanyahu? Sharon? Do you believe these Arabs are empowered in a nation that slaughters their people wholesale? Why do you succumb so easily to the illusions created in your mind by the Israeli PR machine?
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 3:32pm
What kind of one-sides perspective can a man have?
I'm asking the same question about you.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 3:35pm
Is it the responsibility of the US to take in every economic refugee from Latin America?
an absurd example.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 3:36pm
On "democracy" and accountability.
The Palestinian people elected Hamas to represent them. As a result, their government officials were kidnapped, their government destroyed, their populations strangled economically to an enormous level of despair by an oppressor that wouldn't even let in UN human rights inspectors to formally document the pain, and now, they are bombed and machine-gunned.
Collective punishment for the perceived sins of their only government apparatus, their only security apparatus, their only social and humanitarian apparatus.
Well then; when the "democratic" Israeli government commits these atrocities; and the rockets rain down; and the suicide bombers and gunmen show up ... is this not the same reasoning for "collective punishment" that the Israelis use in destroying Gaza as a result of their objection to and antagonization of Hamas? If the Palestinians are to be held collectively responsible for the sins of Hamas, because the Palestinians supported Hamas, then how is this different than the Israeli population being held accountable by Palestinians, with "collective punishment" inflicted upon them?
If you choose to support Israel, then you choose to support the calculus of nihilism in the pursuit of a geopolitical agenda, and you will certainly be victim of your own calculus as well.
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 3:37pm
syfriendly
you're not arguing with me, but rather with yourself. if I don't agree with you, I must be for the opposite. and that's just not true.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 3:38pm
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 3:36pm | ignore this person | warn this person
No less absurd than your willful refusal to acknowledge and openly consider the many and varied sound arguments indicating that Israel is its own worse enemies and the crimes it commits while doing so are unthinkably brutal and intolerable.
Congratulations on your closed mind. You may hate what I write, but I can see very clearly that I can see the issue with a greater clarity than yourself.
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 3:39pm
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 3:35pm | ignore this person | warn this person
No, you are not asking any such question of me. You are rather avoiding and dodging every compelling point and argument being against Israel in its current naked war crimes and crimes against humanity. You're not deliberating, debating, or even thinking, you are visibly sandbagging, stonewalling, and avoiding engagement. Attempting to dismiss what so many of us are stating about Israel and with such compelling evidence, is not the same as refuting anything said. You have not engaged with the points made by myself or anyone else here, you simply hide.
Again, I feel sorry for you. It is one thing to disagree, quite another to stand on low moral ground proudly while plugging your ears to the shouts coming down from above.
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 3:41pm
I can see the issue with a greater clarity than yourself.
hahahahahahaha, funny, funny.you self righteous prig.
I am capable of sorrow for the palestinian plight, whereas you are incapable of admitting the suffering of Israelis.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 3:43pm
"I am capable of sorrow for the palestinian plight, whereas you are incapable of admitting the suffering of Israelis"
when the suffering of one people far exceeds the suffering of the other, it's hard to feel sorrow for the other.
Posted by darladoon at 01/04/2009 @ 3:47pm
What does that tell us about ourselves? Our own warped standards?
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 3:14pm
It tells us we are backing the right side ...
Posted by YourJomamma at 01/04/2009 @ 3:48pm
What would any of you do? And how might you think? If for 60 years you'd lived on the remnants of land you once had, which was taken from you and your parents and grandparents by a foreign invader holding a decree authored by people whom you'd never heard of or met, and who took your land by force and gave it to their religious fanatics to live on, and who economically strangled you, bulldozed your homes, bulldozed your orchards, destroyed your shops and markets, bombed your sites of worship, destroyed your attempts at developing your own government? placed as the minimum conditions for "peace" that you live no longer as a people but the impoverished subjects of a racist regime that held you in contempt? that killed you and your parents, your sisters, daughters, sons, and cousins with impunity? that treated you as an ignorant aboriginal population subject to the whims of the new rulership?
How might any of you think?
And if in the course meddling with your own attempts at forming your own provisional government authority, this new and recently foreign power helped to create an even more radicalized and militant faction in your government, to foment instability and weaken you, and then bombed you and strangled you economically for daring to support this new faction?
How would any of you think? Feel?
The intellectual chauvinism or outright racist tone-deafness of the American public to the position the Palestinians occupy never ceases to shock me. If the perpetrators of Israel could not claim to be Jewish then their crimes would never have been tolerated. How sick are they, a people that uses an episode like The Holocaust as a fig leaf for the post-Holocaust colonial crimes, crimes incidentally that some of these people had planned before the name "Hitler" was heard?
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 3:49pm
"If the perpetrators of Israel could not claim to be Jewish then their crimes would never have been tolerated"
this is probably true, although i would never say it.
Posted by darladoon at 01/04/2009 @ 3:54pm
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 3:43pm | ignore this person | warn this person
I express my greatest condolences to the family and friends of the four Israelis killed after their government started a brutal air war on the people of Gaza. Furthermore, I extend my condolences to the residents of southern Israel who are being inconvenienced by the rockets falling around them, which have damaged several structures.
If only their government's actions weren't so thrilling to them that the electoral position of the government that directed the air war has completely reversed such that these poor, suffering Israelis are now going to vote this latest gallery of murderers into power in February's election. If only.
I also, incidentally, applaud your profoundly racist standards, wherein 4 people killed - as a result of their own government's action - is somehow equal in your mind to the greater than 500 now killed (including lots of little terrorist babies) and greater than 2000 injured in order for that wicked regime to the North to engage in its Machievellian electoral machinations.
Such "enlightenment" is had by these poor Israelis. And alas, four of them had to die for the "enlightenment" to continue.
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 3:55pm
by most standards of measurement, Israeli arabs are better off than the residents of all the arab countries surrounding Israel.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 3:56pm
"It tells us we are backing the right side ..."
one can take things seriously, and often be wrong, but to take things unseriously, and often be wrong? that's the very definition of Coward.
Posted by darladoon at 01/04/2009 @ 3:56pm
inconvenienced by the rockets falling around them,
what else is there to say?
wake me when the Israelis have killed six million arabs.then we'll talk.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 3:58pm
Wait! Wait! I must alter my previous statement - I extend my greatest condolences to the *three Israeli civilians* killed by Hamas rocket fire since their government started an air war on the people of Gaza.
Just as is the Western custom to deny condolences or concern for any militant who is killed in the Palestinian territories, I must deny my condolences to the two Israeli soldiers who are dead now.
Furthermore, I must retroactively de-extend my condolences to any of the three Israeli civilians killed who were male; as is the custom Western media and mind, Palestinian men are discounted among the "civilian" deaths in the totals published and the condolences extended, as all are apparently militants. This same tradition I take with Israel.
So to re-phase my previous condolences, "I extend my greatest condolences to the subset of the three civilians killed who were not men."
This is the same sort of regard that the West holds for Palestinian deaths, and I choose to hold that regard for Israeli deaths.
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 3:59pm
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 3:58pm | ignore this person | warn this person
The Arabs did not kill 6 million Jews. This is your most laughable comment today, but it *perfectly* expresses the psychosis in the mindstate that so easily blesses the Israeli crimes: "Because six million Jews died in the Holocaust, Israel can kill any number of any people it chooses, under any terms it chooses, without blame."
What an idiotic and fatuous statement you make.
Let me inject another thought hopefully through that dense bony matter on your shoulders: the effort to create Israel existed LONG BEFORE the name "Hitler" was ever heard. The land was promised to Western European religious fanatics by the US and Britain in the form of the Balfour Declaration ("one nation solemnly promising another nation the land of a third") and the Holocaust was used as a lever to complete the political efforts in the Western international political world.
The Holocaust does not excuse one murdered Palestinian.
You are now no less than admitting your own intellectual bankruptcy. Again, I feel sorry for you, standing proudly on the low moral ground, plugging your ears to avoid hearing the shouts from above.
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 4:03pm
Hey syfriendly,
You said, above: "Their rocket fire started up *after* the Israelis attacked Gaza and killed lots of Palestinians. "
What is this? Are you being tutored by Bill Clinton in how to lie?
YOUR statement, above, is an unadulterated lie.
The rockets have been going on for a long time now, it didn't just start.
Here are the facts:
http://www.israeliconsulatela.org/ advocacy.asp?id=51
Posted by sjchermak at 01/04/2009 @ 4:06pm
syfriendly: Rather odd to see you calling everyone else "close-minded". I suggest you look in a mirror. The plight of the Palenstinians is mostly due to their own decisions. Voting for Hamas in Gaza was much like Germans voting for Hitler. Once in office, they eliminate the right to vote but they reap the sorrow of a murderous regime. The people of Gaza had a chance in 2005 and they blew it. They have been forced to live by the dictum "The decisions you make dictates the life you lead". If Israel can crush this blight called Hamas, the people of Gaza may have a chance for peace with their neighbors and a prosperous life, else it will be more of the same.
Posted by pyeatte at 01/04/2009 @ 4:07pm
How insane. The Palestinian Jews can never have legitimacy until the Palestinians agree.
Posted by ehross at 01/04/2009 @ 4:14pm
Posted by OneVote at 01/04/2009 @ 1:12pm
"SPOKESMAN FOR US PRESIDENT-ELECT BARACK OBAMA
"The president-elect is closely monitoring global events, including the situation in Gaza."
Yes, my friend, simply monitoring, not moved-by or horrified-by events in Gaza. This affectless filth continues to do the bidding of those that have purchased him while kids die. But, then again, when did Obama ever have much interest in saving the lives of little children?
Here's a link that just might interest you. Let me know your impressions:
http://www.counterpunch.org/whitney12312008.html
Posted by john lowell at 01/04/2009 @ 4:15pm
The land was promised to Western European religious fanatics by the US and Britain in the form of the Balfour Declaration
the US had nothing to do with Balfour. get off your high horse and read some history.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 4:16pm
This is your most laughable comment today,
I see you almost got the black humor.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 4:18pm
the original Zionists were mostly secular jews.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 4:19pm
"the US had nothing to do with Balfour. get off your high horse and read some history."
And check out what the Russians did for Israel that the west(US) did not...
Posted by YourJomamma at 01/04/2009 @ 4:21pm
I see Darlaoon has been at the bong again...wow.
Posted by YourJomamma at 01/04/2009 @ 4:22pm
The Cheney interview today was outrageous. We've had reptiles as political leaders for years but none that ever paralleled quite so closely the personal style of Hermann Goering. With any justice this man will be in the dock at the Hague for his complicity in war crimes. Just don't expect that weasel, Obama, to see to an indictment, which, of course, will make him, Obama, as complicit as Cheney. What pigs run this country!
Posted by john lowell at 01/04/2009 @ 4:28pm
Posted by john lowell at 01/04/2009 @ 4:15pm | ignore this person | warn this person
as compared with what the president of the US said and DID in response to the war in Gaza. which is zilch. what's his excuse?
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 4:29pm
osted by john lowell at 01/04/2009 @ 4:28pm | ignore this person | warn this person
you're pretty porcine yourself
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 4:30pm
Posted by pyeatte at 01/04/2009 @ 4:07pm | ignore this person | warn this person
It is very difficult to imagine anyone saying that the Palestinians have caused their own problems. This profoundly deranged statement is the statement of someone who is completely off the deep end.
Things for you to consider follow
Did the Palestinians invade Western Europe in 1948, holding in front of them a document authored by the Arab League declaring a portion of Poland their own?
Do the Palestinians have a military capacity on par with Israels? Or are they mainly subject to the whims of Israel when it comes to real military force?
Do the Palestinians currently voluntarily live on the small regions of land they have? Are they allowed to flee when Israel engages in military actions against them?
Are the Palestinians currently residing on land that they have never had claim to, land they only took by force?
Do the Palestinians regularly destroy the economic life of Israel? Do these people forcefully take land in Israel to settle on, harassing or killing the former residents? Bulldozing the residents' homes and shooting them if they resist?
In terms of formal international law, which resolutions are the Palestinians currently in violation of?
Has every attempt by the Palestinians to create their own democratic and elected government apparatus been respected by Israel? What happened the last time they tried to create an elected an accountable government, as opposed to the militias that currently attempt to run their society?
Do Palestinians, when they get elected, face being kidnapped and imprisoned by Israel?
The Palestinian people has been backed into a corner. They live in abject misery and terror. They live without any hope whatsoever. Their only hope is resistance.
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 4:32pm
BTW,
SYFRIRNDLY..give me a little history on the offical country of Palestine if you are able since you seem to have so many other "facts" at you finger tips...
when was it founded and by whom?
who is their G Washington or Jefferson , so to speak?
do you, Syfriendly, have any animosity for the Jordanians and what they did to the Palestinians in the 70's?
Also,..
What is the Palestiain national anthem?
What is the capital of the Palestinian country?
When was Palestine formed as a country?
What is the history of the Palestinian nation?
What is the national boundry of Palestine?
What is the GNP of Palestine? What was it 80 years ago? 70? ect?
Who are the most famous Palestinian heros that have contributed to the betterment of all mankind from the nation of Palestine?
what is the national Palestinian language?
What is their national currency?
How many Nobel Peace prizes winners from Palestine?
How many ambassiters do they have to the rest of the world and how many embassys do they have?
Have any other countrys ever had a Palestine embassy in the past?
Anything you can do will help me undeerstand your, ah, bias for Palestine.
Did you feel the same about, say, the East Germans or the Poles after WW2? How about the Jews?
Posted by YourJomamma at 01/04/2009 @ 4:33pm
Posted by john lowell at 01/04/2009 @ 4:28pm | ignore this person | warn this person
your smear of Obama would have made Goebbels proud. Cheney too. you're a phony.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 4:35pm
Their only hope is resistance. Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 4:32pm | ignore this person | warn this person
how has this been working out for them?
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 4:36pm
he US had nothing to do with Balfour. get off your high horse and read some history. Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 4:16pm | ignore this person | warn this person
While it was primarily British the Four Great Powers (which included Italy and the United States) were deeply involved with the background of it and the US and Britain are behind the creation of Israel.
Besides some sort of pedantic academic point, did you have any response whatsoever to what was actually intended? You are really pathetic. I point out to you in response to this hysterical statement from you "The Jews did not kill 6 million Arabs" that the Holocaust was not the source of Israel, but the colonialism and the religious fanaticism driving behind it pre-dated the name "Hitler", and you make some pedantic reply as to the formal origin of the Balfour Declaration. How pathetic and cowardly of you! You haven't rebutted a single argument made to you today! You can't!
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 4:37pm
your smear of Obama would have made Goebbels proud. Cheney too. you're a phony. Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 4:35pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Given the Zionist Fanatic he appointed as his Chief of Staff, and given that Fanatic's father's equation of Arabs to dogs and animals, and given Obama's quiet smile and nod as this criminal aggression continues, given Obama's obsequious groveling in front of the Israel lobby and the united political lobbying of rich American Jews, and given his appointment to his cabinet of no figure who has ever had any daylight between himself and Israel, I don't know why anyone would imagine Obama will be an improvement.
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 4:39pm
Posted by syfriendly
you know nothing. at least I am acquainted with the facts of history. you are not helping your points with ignorance and lies.facts are so pedantic and academic.
antisemitism was well established before Hitler came along.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 4:41pm
Hamas was elected. In a UN-monitored election. The US and Israel responded by kidnapping a number of the elected officials via direct military incursions into Gaza and the West Bank, imprisoning them indefinitely and without trial in Israel, and rejecting the elected government and suspending negotiations of any sort with the Palestinian Authority until Hamas was no longer the elected power. Israel and the US worked with Fatah to provoke a civil conflict that collapsed the Palestinian Authority and any hopes of non-militia government for the Palestinians. Then, Israel, with the blessing of the US imposed total economic sanctions on the people and land of Gaza in an attempt to strangle the people and coerce them to not support Hamas. When that failed, and with Israel's elections nearing in just weeks, Israel has started a criminal war of aggression against the Palestinian people in Gaza.
And America's supporters of Israel? YOU BLEAT ABOUT "TERRORISM"!!!!!!!!
Israel has demonstrated the worst terrorism in the land!!
And you supporters of Israel?? YOU BLEAT ABOUT "DEMOCRACY"!!!!!
Israel is the greatest opponent of Arab democracy in the lands!!! The one democracy that formed next to them, they declared war on it and are committing war crimes and crimes against humanity in order to stamp out every last vestige of what got elected!!! Israel has declared war on the very right of people outside of Israel to disagree with their regime and its agenda!! To resist their abuses!!!
And they use The Holocaust as a diversion, as a fig leaf, as a veil beneath which to shroud this activity!!
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 4:50pm
Their only hope is resistance. Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 4:32pm | ignore this person | warn this person how has this been working out for them? Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 4:36pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Like their attempt at democracy, Israel is crushing their attempt at resistance, brutally.
How's is Israel's "way of relating" to Arab peoples' and the Palestinians working out for them? How are colonialism and apartheid working out for Israel? How are torture and assassinations working out for Israel? How are the bulldozers working out for Israel?? How is the racism and religious fanaticism working out for Israel? How is oppression and military force as the sole means of relating to one's neighbors working out for Israel? How is remaining in massive defiance of international law for forty years working out for Israel? How is using Britain and the US to stonewall further UN legal action against Israel working out for Israel?
How is murdering Palestinians and brutally killing Palestinian resisters working out for Israel?
How is Israel's stupidity and savagery and gross racism working out for Israel?
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 4:54pm
Their only hope is resistance. Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 4:32pm | ignore this person | warn this person how has this been working out for them? Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 4:36pm | ignore this person | warn this person
How has destroying every vestige of civil society that has tried to emerge in the concentration camps referred to as the "occupied territories" worked out for Israel?
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 4:56pm
antisemitism was well established before Hitler came along. Posted by emile
Ah, yes, here it is at last!!! The canard of "anti-Semitism"!!!!!!!!
Israel kills more than 500 people, and wounds well in excess of 2000, and destroys every functioning bit of infrastructure that existed in a concentration camp it forces these impoverished people whose land it took managed to build, and those who complain?
Here it comes ...
"But what about 'anti-Semitism'"?!!
Well, pal, the Palestinians are a Semitic people too. Or perhaps that is too pedantic for you. Unfortunately, there is no form of excuse available for the Israeli savagery. They are no longer the victims of an ancient persecution. They have been for several decades now the persecutor.
The Holocaust does not excuse one single murdered Palestinian. And these Israelis? They live on a bed of dead Palestinian bodies.
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 5:00pm
2600 injured as of today!!!
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 5:11pm
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 3:12pm
"The Palestinians had a freely elected (UN-monitored, unlike our elections here in the US)"
The UN is a joke...
That will be the day the UN monitors, or NEEDS to monitor OUR elections.
If the American population gives in to that, we really have problems.
Posted by ARJIS at 01/04/2009 @ 5:14pm
Posted by ARJIS at 01/04/2009 @ 5:14pm | ignore this person |
Fine, the UN is a joke, and that joke is the authority that created the 1948 partition. Therefore, the 1948 partition is, in your estimation, a "joke".
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 5:16pm
when they start posting all in caps, you know that discourse is finished.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 5:20pm
That will be the day the UN monitors, or NEEDS to monitor OUR elections.
that day has come and gone.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 5:22pm
Here we have the great lovers of peace, the US, blocking a UNSC statement demanding a immediate cease-fire in Gaza:
"U.S. Said to Block U.N. Gaza Statement
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Published: January 4, 2009 Filed at 5:04 a.m. ET
UNITED NATIONS (AP) -- The United States has blocked approval of a U.N. Security Council statement calling for an immediate cease-fire between Israel and Gaza's Hamas rulers, diplomats said ..."
Given that the US is merely doing Israel's bidding at the UN, it would seem clear that neither power wants a cease-fire. In other words, both the US and Israel are thrilled to tears to see this carnage taking place.
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 5:37pm
both the US and Israel are thrilled to tears to see this carnage taking place. Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 5:37pm | ignore this person | warn this person
you are a disgusting individual. who the hell are you to accuse everyone in two countries of that. you are a Hamas stooge.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 5:39pm
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 5:20pm | ignore this person | warn this person
With you, discourse never began. You pooh-pooh and sniff and scoff but you say nothing of substance.
For the third time, you have not today engaged with a single point made by critics of Israel's barbaric rampage in Gaza. Not a SINGLE point have you engaged with at all. You hide, you dodge, you plug your ears, you sniff and scoff, but you offer nothing. Israel is killing a huge number of people, and destroying the barely functional society that they have struggled to build up around them in an open-air concentration camp they have been confined to. It is for Israel (and its bleating American supporters) to defend this savagery.
You can't even begin to engage.
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 5:40pm
you're lucky anyone paid any attention to you at all. go argue with yourself.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 5:42pm
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 5:39pm | ignore this person | warn this person
No, I am not a "Hamas stooge". Nor am I a disgusting individual; it would seem that you are the one apologizing for an absolutely brutal, illegal, and deeply criminal rampage that Israel is engaging in, according to *Israeli newspaper*, potentially in order to influence the outcome of its upcoming elections.
On the Israelis being thrilled:
" ... Finally, a month and a half before the elections, Israel takes some action. I definitely see this as linked, but it's OK, better late than never. What's been happening in Gaza is fantastic. I feel very bad about the man killed in [the Israeli town of] Netivot ..." -- Mechi Fendel, Israeli
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7801641.stm
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 5:46pm
Notice, Emil, in the post above? The Israeli woman is not only clearly thrilled by the carnage in Gaza - she is also a lot more honest than you about it, about her feelings about it, and, unlike you, she is willing to acknowledge that it probably has a lot to do with the upcoming Israeli elections.
Or is Mendi just a "Hamas stooge"?
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 5:47pm
The Israeli perspetive: "What's been happening in Gaza is fantastic."
Posted by syfriendly at 01/04/2009 @ 5:50pm
north-americans indians were robbed and exterminated because they wore feathers and thus were clearly not civilized (the suckers did not even know how to lie and cheat when they first encountered anglosaxon western civilizators !). palestinians are tanned, profess the wrong religion --certainly more now than before when they were all commies-- and earlier they relied too much on camels and were therefore militarily inferior to western civilizators. of course none of that indicates genuine civilization or potential for true civilization down the road so that's why the great democraciesTM decided to give the palestinian land to the zionists in order to make up for german crimes. the zionists like to read a very old book quite related to the old book preferred in the great democraciesTM, so the zionists are truly civilized and hence deserved that land (meritocracy!) more than the people with camels, bazaars, and funny hats (the harem thing though, should be saved perhaps !?). does that sounds like an incoherent decision that failed to punish the germans, rewarded zionist coveting of a land already inhabited by a third party (a major sin but condoned when it pays off, of course!), and created a huge mess at the same time !? well, the whole helped big time to defeat the ruskjies (and save the financial feudal class from social-justice barbarians). and in any case the designs of the international great-democratic community are inscrutable and should be accepted as revelation (otherwise you are anti-great-democratic).
Posted by erplus at 01/04/2009 @ 6:02pm
joking aside, the sympathies of the world's public opinion for the palestinians remain without much consequence because throughout the world bribed politicians elected by rigged electoral mechanisms designed to make them blackmailable by moneyed, finer citizens (otherwise you have barbarism and rampant bad taste), as a side effect make the same bribed politicians also blackmailable by zionist tycoons (like those who truly have the say at AIPAC). so don't blame the zionists or the politicians and especially don't make fun of the disenfranchised public opinion since this disenfranchisement together with the conviction that only greed works, are the foundations of The Triumph of The Great DemocraciesTM (together with military technology of course).
Posted by erplus at 01/04/2009 @ 6:02pm
that's why the great democraciesTM decided to give the palestinian land to the zionists in order to make up for german crimes.
you don't know what you are talking about. Jews were promised a home land in 1917.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 6:05pm
i empathize with the suffering of both israelis and palestinians, and for years was a lot more sympathetic with the palestinian cause than i am now.
the problem i have is this...
not saying the palestinians are the balckguards and the israelis the pure as new driven snow good guys...
but year after year the palestinian people prove to me that they enjoy their suffering by continueing to support violent racist terrorist organizations like hamas who call for the "destruction of israel" (which is a euphemism for "holocaust II"), and year after year support those who do violence on israel.
a few years back i would have told svfriendly he was preaching to the choir, but in that the palestinians insist on supporting violent jihadism that dreams of genocide...
again i empathize with the suffering of all, even those who deserve it, but if ya banging your head against a concrete wall and expecting folks to take your side against the wall and feel sorry because your head is all bloodied...
hard to get all worked up over your bloody head...
israel is a concrete wall. palestinians need to get that into their heads and give up on bloody fantasies of "the final solution: part II"...
some have, but in light of their democratically elected support of the party of bloody terrorist jihad, apparantly some responsibility for the current responsive actions of israel does indeed lie in the laps of more than the hard core jihadist leadership of hamas...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 01/04/2009 @ 6:07pm
john lowell,
You express hatred towards both Barack Obama and Dick Cheney.
Since they are at opposite ends of the political spectrum, this tells me something about you.
That would be, that you may be one of those people that complain about everything. You are never satisfied about anything. Everything is wrong!
With you, the glass of water may be half empty, not half full.
This blog is about politics, government, international affairs, foreign policy, etc - but in other areas of your life you may be miserable, too.
You probably complain about other things in your life. There may be something wrong with any food you eat, none of it is OK to you, for example.
I personally don't know you, that is why I use the word "may", but it may be that you are miserable to be around, always complaining about everything.
Maybe you should lighten up, or something, and relax and try to find something good about something.
Posted by sjchermak at 01/04/2009 @ 6:30pm
>>>"There is no doubt that as long as Hamas controls Gaza, it is a problem for Israel, a problem for the Palestinians and a problem for the entire region."<<<
I know these Israeli politicians are merely posturing for the upcoming election, but positions like the one stated above should be viewed as OBSCENE by democratic societies.
You can't advocate for democracy around the globe and then call for the elimination by force of any democratically elected party with whom you disagree.
Posted by Metteyya at 01/04/2009 @ 7:29pm
Outrage around the world about the crisis in Palestine and the outrage around the world about the Iraq invasion just falls on deaf ears here in the US. We have to have the last word and condone it all...what a disgrace. Is there any wonder why we are so hated around the world...bully boy's in Iraq and Puppet's of Israel in this latest crisis. We like to talk about democracy and fair elections..yet when they had an election in Palestine and their democratic choice was Hamas that was not good enough for us or Israel!!! Where do we get off dictating to other countries who they can and can't choose as their leader...and when will we get a backbone and stop this constant backing of Israel?
Posted by Caj at 01/04/2009 @ 7:47pm
What amazes me is that the people who complain so loudly about genocidal acts every time they play the Holocaust card (which is every other whipstitch) would then go about perpetrating the same on the people of Gaza and the West Bank.
What's up with that? Hey, Israelis, are you paying attention? You're destroying Gaza AND your international reputation.
-Wexler
Posted by WWWexler at 01/04/2009 @ 8:07pm
Posted by YourJomamma at 01/04/2009 @ 4:33pm
jm,
you couldn't answer those questions about 97.37% of nations.
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/04/2009 @ 8:11pm
humans are so dumb....
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/04/2009 @ 8:12pm
What's up with that? Hey, Israelis, are you paying attention? You're destroying Gaza AND your international reputation.
Posted by WWWexler at 01/04/2009 @ 8:07pm
and REALLY pissing off lots and lots of unemployed young men.....
oh well. anything for an election.
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/04/2009 @ 8:16pm
Do we want to propose peace? Or do we want what we want? The big picture is of major consequence. The future of Isreal will not be a sustainable one with these continued atrocities. Neither any other faction that continues to try to shut out the people that have suffered under colonial imperalism without at least being civil to those who find themselves under rule. The days of things we know are happening and are unbalanced are numbered. There will be a reckoning, the question is will all factions that are involved, that have at the moment the power to change the direction of these crimes, stop and reconsider? Or will they continue on hoping that just continuing will save their interest in the end? Either stop or destroy yourselves, your choice.
Posted by theindividual at 01/04/2009 @ 8:18pm
The US & Israel are indeed pleased in crushing the Palestinians of Gaza.
But the reference is to the govts, not the entire populations of the US & Israel.
Posted by sloper at 01/04/2009 @ 8:26pm
@CAJ: See what happens when an elected leader in the US - i.e. congress-men/women, or Jimmy Carter - talk about Israel in a non-condoning manner: They get called "anti-semite" and their views are marginalized by the major news-networks. Ergo, no leader in the US dare talk about Israel without going to AIPAC'r reunions to win reelections, which means no backbone for years to come.
@Everyone. 1. Please, explain to me why the US (and Israel) became outraged at Russia's response to Georgia's attack on South Wassihirstand (spelling?) in the Summer and then they commit this book-perfect war-crime in Gaza? There are no beacons of freedom in this world when democratically elected nations terrorize the weak for political gains that are at least luxurious.
2. Upon being, elected Hamas omitted its call for Israel's destruction from its Charter on Jan 12th 2006. Israel *then* arrested its new political wing. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jan/12/israel).
Palestinians are Arabs and indeed also semites, so please don't use CNN/FOX/MSNBC errata for your arguments.
The Holocaust that happened in Germany was one of the worst human catastrophies in the history of humanity, but that is no reason to look beyond what is today's Holocaust II in Palestine, albeit a modern version.
Israeli's living as perimeter settlers or in small enclaves on recently stolen land get no sympathy from me because they are no different from soldiers of the IDF as they carry assault rifles with them and carry militant agendas.
3. This conflict has been going on for more than 60 years. Instead of sitting and slinging mud at each other on who started which conflict and how many people have died here and there, discuss possible final solutions - numbers speak for themselves. Is a permanent Palestinian state ever possible next to/inside Israel? If so, under what preconditions. Are those conditions legitimate and realistic.
4. Think outside the box. Does having this conflict go on and on help anyone? Could the US have ended this conflict years ago if fair efforts were truly spent on this conflict?
Posted by malmassa at 01/04/2009 @ 8:31pm
Once more, it remains that only the Palestinians never get to speak for themselves. Edward Said is gone, but the non violent, non Hamas and non Fatah activist Mustafa Barghouti is alive, well, interviewed and published everywhere, but here. The same for Rami Khouri who I've mentioned before who is also neither Hamas nor Fatah, is also interviewed and published often, but not here. And there are others. Only not here.
The result is without Palestinians, we get the usual assumptions about Hamas, Fatah, Hezbollah, and Israel, and repeated over and over, the latest war becomes a war between Israel and Hamas. It is taken for granted Israel is legitimate and reacting and Hamas is fundamentalist, fanatical, terrorist and illegitimate. The Palestinians themselves little more than ciphers for whatever anyone wants, never active participants.
What is missing entirely is any understanding of Israeli continuing strategic intent in what is going on as experienced by Palestinians, and an incoherent historical context. Dreyfuss goes on again about Israeli or Hamas calculations or miscalculations, agencies operating in some disconnected ether. Whatever, Dreyfuss may think of Hamas, it is irrelevant without a wider perspective, which could be filled in by Mustafa Barghouti and Rami Khouri who are secular, non violent, and intellectually honest, but happen to be Palestinians and never heard from here, and all the more importantly, they represent opinions which carry a legitimacy Dreyfuss totally lacks.
It's like understanding the history of the US version of New World Slavery, without ever hearing from the slaves themselves, Frederick Douglas or Sojourner Truth. Or Castro and the Cuban Revolution without the Latin American experience, and opinion.
Charlie M.
Posted by cmsandia at 01/04/2009 @ 8:32pm
Well said CMsandia!
Also, let it be noted that Israel is using depleted uranium and that is another illega item to add their list.Israel is a burden on US democracyand should be lcut off from US funding... lathough this will never happend.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2009/0102/1230842350607.html
Posted by malmassa at 01/04/2009 @ 8:50pm
Miscellaneous comments:
Caj said : "We like to talk about democracy and fair elections..yet when they had an election in Palestine and their democratic choice was Hamas that was not good enough for us or Israel!!!"
My comment: Probably because Hamas went about firing rockets into Israel, terrorizing it's people, and because Hamas wants no Israel and kills Jewish people to achieve that goal. Just a guess, but I think that had something to do with it.
malmassa asked : " Is a permanent Palestinian state ever possible next to/inside Israel? If so, under what preconditions. Are those conditions legitimate and realistic. "
My comment: The answer is yes, under the precondition (stated and LIVED UP TO) that the Palestinians as well as the rest of the Arabic world give up on their desire for no Israel, and give up attempts to make that happen. That is of course legitimate. The Palestinians and Arabic people have shown over and over again, however, that it is not realistic. They have no intention of ever doing that, and nobody demands they do.
cmsandia said "It is taken for granted Israel is legitimate and reacting and Hamas is fundamentalist, fanatical, terrorist and illegitimate."
My comment: This is not "for granted". It is blatantly obvious.
cmsandia also commented " It's like understanding the history of the US version of New World Slavery, without ever hearing from the slaves themselves, Frederick Douglas or Sojourner Truth. Or Castro and the Cuban Revolution without the Latin American experience, and opinion. "
My comment: In the US version of new world slavery we DO HEAR from Frederick Douglass, Sojourner Truth, Harriet Tubman and plenty of others. This is a free country and American history is an OPEN BOOK where the past is NOT hidden.
Posted by sjchermak at 01/04/2009 @ 8:57pm
I think what is missed in all this is how the Israeli government's actions will hurt Jews in Israel. Individual terrorists will respond to Israel's state terrorism, and more Israelis will die.
I also wonder how this will affect various Nazi type folks. I've already seen a few handing out literature about how the Holocaust never happened; etc, and this is just another Zionist attempt to control the world that goes along with their control of banks and media; etc....despite all evidence to the contrary.
As I wondered a few days ago, what would our response be to this if instead of Palestinians, that neck of the woods was populated by Irish folks.
Posted by onthehelm at 01/04/2009 @ 8:57pm
you couldn't answer those questions about 97.37% of nations.
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/04/2009 @ 8:11pm
Come on Frosty..thaw out the brain...
maybe not from memory, but for distinct nations the info is available..
Palestine is not a country, a nation or a people...it is a collection of mixed peoples that lived in the area for years...not a formal nation with a distinct history..
Posted by YourJomamma at 01/04/2009 @ 9:11pm
onthehelm,
Since "Irish folks" do not hate Jews, and do not try to kill Jews, your hypothetical scenario would not even exist.
There would be no "response" needed from us, because Ireland and Israel would be living side by side in peace.
And please, don't anybody try to post back and declare how ignorant I am because I am well aware of the Troubles (sectarian violence in Northern Ireland). Irish Protestants at war with Irish Catholics.
But the main reason for my posting is to indicate how ridiculous onthehelm's hypothetical scenario is.
Why is that? It is because onthehelm essentially "musing" that Americans have a racist attitude towards Palestinians.
But if onthehelm is ready to start throwing penalty flags for something that doesn't exist, perhaps look it this way.
Isn't it justified to be a little ticked off at a people (Palestinians and other Arabic people) who have a desire for no Israel, seek to kill Jewish people, will not back off of this goal and sometimes make agreements they never live up to because they have no intention of ever backing off of this goal, and forsake their own chance to have a stable existence for their people and have peace in the region in pursuit of this goal, and do things which get them portrayed as the victims (i.e., intentionally cause situations where their own people get killed) in order to draw support from people like the staff at The Nation?
Israel has attempted where possible to limit civilian casualties, whereas Hamas seems to actually welcome innocents getting killed so as to win this automatic support from a large part of the world.
If some people express disgust or angst at the Palestinians or other Arabic people, there certainly are concrete reasons why they do.
Posted by sjchermak at 01/04/2009 @ 9:13pm
I said above "If some people express disgust or angst at the Palestinians or other Arabic people, there certainly are concrete reasons why they do."
After seeing my comment, it leads me to another comment.
This will draw the penalty flag and scorn from Brunowe. Brunowe can go fly a kite, I don't care.
I correct or modify my statement above about there being concrete reasons for angst.
That is true, for the most part. However, not true in Lower Manhattan.
The absence of 2 concrete reasons there is also why there is angst.
Have at it now Brunowe, and go fly a kite while you do.
Posted by sjchermak at 01/04/2009 @ 9:20pm
Syfriendly --- you are speaking the forbidden truth. Israel is a cruel illegal imperialist nation committing genocide on the Palestinians so as to take their land. They have become the Nazis to the Palestinians. And the U.DS. politicians do and say nothing to stop the slaughter, instead they drone on about the "security of Israel". Actually they care nothing about the longterm security of the U.S. Enraging the billion Muslims of the world is not good for the security of the U.S. But the U.S. politicians are just puppets of AIPAC. And yes: all people whose ancestors are from the area of Palestine are Semites. But most Israelis are of European descent, and are not Semites. So the "anti-Semetic" label is a cheap inaccurate device. Collective punishment is a violation of the Geneva Accords. So Israel is committing war crimes. And since the U.S. blocks any action on the U.N Security Council, the U.S. is also guilty of war crimes. ( Nothing new-this is the nation that dropped nuclear bombs on undefended cities in Japan.)
Posted by philbq at 01/04/2009 @ 9:25pm
Typo: U.S. politicians are craven puppets of AIPAC.
Posted by philbq at 01/04/2009 @ 9:29pm
Netanyahu--"that Israel cannot stop its action until Hamas is utterly defeated, whatever that means."
I find it fascinating that even the Right in ISRAEL!!!!...is no more SPECIFIC than the Right in the US is about their "ultimate solution" to the problem.
Posted by Mask at 01/04/2009 @ 9:53pm
philbq,
Your post is complete nonsense. But somehow once this type of thought gets started, you just keep going and going and going, just like the Energizer Bunny.
You do remember, don't you, that the purpose of the nuclear bombs on Japan were to end the war quickly rather than through an invasion of Japan.
That invasion would have made any other war or battle that has happened in history look like child's play.
The Japanese would have fought to the death. The number of people that would have been dead on both sides (including Japanese civilians) would have been unimaginable.
But of course, the bombings are cited by those such as you as more wrong by the U.S.
Some leftist magazines/sites/authors have attempted in recent times to show that the Japanese were about to surrender and Truman just used the bombs not necessarily to stop World War II but to intimidate the Soviet Union after the war.
The Soviets were our ally during the war but most realized that the opposite would be happening after the war. (Remember General Patton thought we should keep going in Europe and take on the Soviets?)
But all these leftist theories (about Hiroshima and our purpose for bombing that city) have been debunked. The Weekly Standard had an article on that.
Why Truman Dropped the Bomb From the August 8, 2005 issue: Sixty years after Hiroshima, we now have the secret intercepts that shaped his decision. by Richard B. Frank 08/08/2005 http://www.weeklystandard.com/ Content/Public/Articles/ 000/000/005/894mnyyl.asp?pg=1
Posted by sjchermak at 01/04/2009 @ 9:57pm
SJ, like a response on my question on the other thread....
Do you believe-
1. Bush is a great President?
2. Iran poses a serious threat to us and Israel?
and additionally-
3. What has Bush done to blunt Iran's grave threat to us?
Posted by Mask at 01/04/2009 @ 10:06pm
That invasion would have made any other war or battle that has happened in history look like child's play.
this is by no means universally accepted. some generals and some historians believe that the war was shortened by a matter of days, if that.
when americans got into Japan, they were astounded at the destruction wreaked on Japan BEFORE the nukes were dropped.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 10:08pm
SjChermak, this is where you need to take of your sapphire tinted Israel glasses. Once elected Hamas removed "no Israel" from its Charter. Hamas took steps towards fulfilling its obligations as a democratically elected party in Palestine. Israel broke their promises again with kidnappings and illegal blockades. Hamas wanted to extend the ceasefire on December 26th (after 6 months of calm!). Israel attacks on Dec 27th.
How come the US gov't is not all up in arms about this Israeli attack on Gaza as they were when Russia responded to Georgia's (Israeli-trained) aggression?
They are not two-faced, just a complicit co-conspirator to Israel aggression and war-crimes. Someday, Israel will have to stand forth and be held responsible for these atrocities in Palestine over the past 60+ years
Posted by malmassa at 01/04/2009 @ 10:14pm
the weekly standard? pffft.sjchermak? double pffft. read a book.
here's one that won a Pulitzer, something that the weekly standard will never gain.
John W. Dower, Embracing Defeat. Japan in the wake of WW2
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 10:16pm
After I made my post about Hiroshima, I realized that no doubt philbq will be posting in with some kind of angry invective, Mask will chime in about how I am just repeating what Rush told me, somebody no doubt will say (maybe ficheye) that the Weekly Standard is invalid right-wing propaganda, and PhillipMcCrevice will remind me that I am an "assclown".
As I result, I sought out the Progressive article I had seen years ago. I could not find it on the web, but I have found 3 articles that promote the theme that Hiroshima was not necessary.
I have read these three articles (that I have pasted the links to below) prior to making this post, as well as re-reading the Weekly Standard article I referenced in my last post.
My conclusion: The Weekly Standard article very clearly refutes these 3 "Hiroshima was not necessary" articles. It brings out things that would not have been known to researchers/authors who created the 3 articles, and not known either to some important people who were quoted in those 3 articles as having angst about Hiroshima.
Before Phil McCrevice or others post in and tell me I am an assclown, you all may want to read these articles. One thing you will see is that these articles are not debating left vs. right politics, but simply the facts surrounding Hiroshima.
============
Journal of Historical Review Why the Atomic Bombings Could Have Been Avoided Was Hiroshima Necessary? by Mark Weber From The Journal of Historical Review, May-June 1997 (Vol. 16, No. 3), pages 4-11. http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v16/v16n3p-4_Weber.html
Hiroshima bomb may have carried hidden agenda 13:46 21 July 2005 by Rob Edwards http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn7706
The lies of Hiroshima are the lies of today 6 Aug 2008 http://www.johnpilger.com/ page.asp?partid=499
Posted by sjchermak at 01/04/2009 @ 10:29pm
sjchermak,
watch the original godzilla. the one without raymond burr.
then tell me if horroshima was necessary.
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/04/2009 @ 10:41pm
emile,
While I was working on my second posting about Hiroshima, you posted in with comments.
You need to read the articles I have posted, all of them. All 4.
They prove my point.
You are not the only one, but just dismissing a conservative publication because it is conservative is just some kind of tactic, but it has no credibility.
How so?
Because, as I said above, these 4 articles do not get into contemporary politics at all.
They just discuss the circumstances of Hiroshima. Regarding what the military was doing, what peace overtures were going on, what information our leaders had, how and why they got it, and what amount of that was ever made public and why.
The Weekly Standard article explains why certain aspects of this were known to very few. It is apparent the other 3 articles are written without the information the Weekly Standard had.
You can't just "diss" it off, you need to refute the facts in the article.
Where contemporary left-right politics do come into play here is not based on what happened then, but how the circumstances are viewed now.
And there are many on the left who showcase Hiroshima as an example of American wrong (unjustly so). This seems to be because some elements of the left are totally mired in obsessing about all perceived American wrong in the past to start with, but also because the left uses examples of past American wrong (as perceived by the Left) to try and build the case that American actions are wrong now, just because American action is suspect (as the Left sees it) and not because of the facts of the matter at hand.
I have attempted to be fair here, and have posted detailed articles presenting both sides of the opinion.
Posted by sjchermak at 01/04/2009 @ 10:41pm
3. What has Bush done to blunt Iran's grave threat to us?
Posted by Mask at 01/04/2009 @ 10:06pm
collapsed the world economy, thus sending oil prices through the floor.
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/04/2009 @ 10:42pm
frosty zoom,
Rather than me watching godzilla, perhaps you could read the articles, eh?
(I am just been funny with the eh? because frosty is Canadian. I am not racist against Canadians, I have a high opinion of Canadians, so I don't need any posts in saying I am racist or ignorant or an assclown because I included the eh? in the post back to frosty.... just trying to make a joke)
You have to think ahead of all possibilities of what might come back at you when posting on a site where rabid leftists are ready to cite you at a moments notice as being an assclown because of this or that shortcoming or ignorance or character flaw or whatever that a Conservative has compared to the enlightened super moral intelligence and personal goodness that Libs possess, simply because they have the good sense and clear thinking to be Lib.
I was about to say that if this secret gets out, then kids all over will just drop out of school because they will know that in order to be viewed as intelligent all one has to do is declare oneself to be a Lib! But then I remembered that public schools (i.e. indoctrination factories) are where many kids learn to be lib in the first place.
They then grow out of being lib when they grow up and have to work and support a family and also pay taxes. Then liberalism isn't as attractive anymore.
(I am just venting a bit because some of the discourse on this site from liberals is utterly ridiculous, so sometimes you have to make light of it and joke about it)
Posted by sjchermak at 01/04/2009 @ 10:53pm
The absence of 2 concrete reasons
Posted by sjchermak at 01/04/2009 @ 9:20pm
here's a few reasons:
SOUTH DAKOTA 1890 (-?) Troops 300 Lakota Indians massacred at Wounded Knee. ARGENTINA 1890 Troops Buenos Aires interests protected. CHILE 1891 Troops Marines clash with nationalist rebels. HAITI 1891 Troops Black revolt on Navassa defeated. IDAHO 1892 Troops Army suppresses silver miners' strike. HAWAII 1893 (-?) Naval, troops Independent kingdom overthrown, annexed. CHICAGO 1894 Troops Breaking of rail strike, 34 killed. NICARAGUA 1894 Troops Month-long occupation of Bluefields. CHINA 1894-95 Naval, troops Marines land in Sino-Japanese War KOREA 1894-96 Troops Marines kept in Seoul during war. PANAMA 1895 Troops, naval Marines land in Colombian province. NICARAGUA 1896 Troops Marines land in port of Corinto. CHINA 1898-1900 Troops Boxer Rebellion fought by foreign armies. PHILIPPINES 1898-1910 (-?) Naval, troops Seized from Spain, killed 600,000 Filipinos CUBA 1898-1902 (-?) Naval, troops Seized from Spain, still hold Navy base. PUERTO RICO 1898 (-?) Naval, troops Seized from Spain, occupation continues. GUAM 1898 (-?) Naval, troops Seized from Spain, still use as base. MINNESOTA 1898 (-?) Troops Army battles Chippewa at Leech Lake. NICARAGUA 1898 Troops Marines land at port of San Juan del Sur. SAMOA 1899 (-?) Troops Battle over succession to throne. NICARAGUA 1899 Troops Marines land at port of Bluefields. IDAHO 1899-1901 Troops Army occupies Coeur d'Alene mining region. OKLAHOMA 1901 Troops Army battles Creek Indian revolt. PANAMA 1901-14 Naval, troops Broke off from Colombia 1903, annexed Canal Zone 1914. HONDURAS 1903 Troops Marines intervene in revolution. DOMINICAN REPUBLIC 1903-04 Troops U.S. interests protected in Revolution. KOREA 1904-05 Troops Marines l
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/04/2009 @ 10:55pm
and in Russo-Japanese War. CUBA 1906-09 Troops Marines land in democratic election. NICARAGUA 1907 Troops "Dollar Diplomacy" protectorate set up. HONDURAS 1907 Troops Marines land during war with Nicaragua PANAMA 1908 Troops Marines intervene in election contest. NICARAGUA 1910 Troops Marines land in Bluefields and Corinto. HONDURAS 1911 Troops U.S. interests protected in civil war. CHINA 1911-41 Naval, troops Continuous occupation with flare-ups. CUBA 1912 Troops U.S. interests protected in civil war. PANAMA 1912 Troops Marines land during heated election. HONDURAS 1912 Troops Marines protect U.S. economic interests. NICARAGUA 1912-33 Troops, bombing 10-year occupation, fought guerillas MEXICO 1913 Naval Americans evacuated during revolution. DOMINICAN REPUBLIC 1914 Naval Fight with rebels over Santo Domingo. COLORADO 1914 Troops Breaking of miners' strike by Army. MEXICO 1914-18 Naval, troops Series of interventions against nationalists. HAITI 1914-34 Troops, bombing 19-year occupation after revolts. DOMINICAN REPUBLIC 1916-24 Troops 8-year Marine occupation. CUBA 1917-33 Troops Military occupation, economic protectorate. WORLD WAR I 1917-18 Naval, troops Ships sunk, fought Germany for 1 1/2 years. RUSSIA 1918-22 Naval, troops Five landings to fight Bolsheviks PANAMA 1918-20 Troops "Police duty" during unrest after elections. HONDURAS 1919 Troops Marines land during election campaign. YUGOSLAVIA 1919 Troops/Marines intervene for Italy against Serbs in Dalmatia. GUATEMALA 1920 Troops 2-week intervention against unionists. WEST VIRGINIA 1920-21 Troops, bombing Army intervenes against mineworkers. TURKEY 1922 Troops Fought nationalists in Smyrna. CHINA 1922-27 Naval, troops Deployment during nationalist revolt. HONDURAS 1924-25 Troops Landed twice during election strife.
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/04/2009 @ 10:55pm
PANAMA 1925 Troops Marines suppress general strike. CHINA 1927-34 Troops Marines stationed throughout the country. EL SALVADOR 1932 Naval Warships send during Marti revolt. WASHINGTON DC 1932 Troops Army stops WWI vet bonus protest. WORLD WAR II 1941-45 Naval, troops, bombing, nuclear Hawaii bombed, fought Japan, Italy and Germay for 3 years; first nuclear war. DETROIT 1943 Troops Army put down Black rebellion. IRAN 1946 Nuclear threat Soviet troops told to leave north. YUGOSLAVIA 1946 Nuclear threat, naval Response to shoot-down of US plane. URUGUAY 1947 Nuclear threat Bombers deployed as show of strength. GREECE 1947-49 Command operation U.S. directs extreme-right in civil war. GERMANY 1948 Nuclear Threat Atomic-capable bombers guard Berlin Airlift. CHINA 1948-49 Troops/Marines evacuate Americans before Communist victory. PHILIPPINES 1948-54 Command operation CIA directs war against Huk Rebellion. PUERTO RICO 1950 Command operation Independence rebellion crushed in Ponce. KOREA 1951-53 (-?) Troops, naval, bombing , nuclear threats U.S./So. Korea fights China/No. Korea to stalemate; A-bomb threat in 1950, and against China in 1953. Still have bases. IRAN 1953 Command Operation CIA overthrows democracy, installs Shah. VIETNAM 1954 Nuclear threat French offered bombs to use against seige. GUATEMALA 1954 Command operation, bombing, nuclear threat CIA directs exile invasion after new gov't nationalized U.S. company lands; bombers based in Nicaragua. EGYPT 1956 Nuclear threat, troops Soviets told to keep out of Suez crisis; Marines evacuate foreigners. LEBANON l958 Troops, naval Marine occupation against rebels. IRAQ 1958 Nuclear threat Iraq warned against invading Kuwait. CHINA l958 Nuclear threat China told not to move on Taiwan isles. PANAMA 1958 Troops Flag protests eru
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/04/2009 @ 10:55pm
pt into confrontation. VIETNAM l960-75 Troops, naval, bombing, nuclear threats Fought South Vietnam revolt & North Vietnam; one million killed in longest U.S. war; atomic bomb threats in l968 and l969. CUBA l961 Command operation CIA-directed exile invasion fails. GERMANY l961 Nuclear threat Alert during Berlin Wall crisis. LAOS 1962 Command operation Military buildup during guerrilla war. CUBA l962 Nuclear threat, naval Blockade during missile crisis; near-war with Soviet Union. IRAQ 1963 Command operation CIA organizes coup that killed president, brings Ba'ath Party to power, and Saddam Hussein back from exile to be head of the secret service. PANAMA l964 Troops Panamanians shot for urging canal's return. INDONESIA l965 Command operation Million killed in CIA-assisted army coup. DOMINICAN REPUBLIC 1965-66 Troops, bombing Marines land during election campaign. GUATEMALA l966-67 Command operation Green Berets intervene against rebels. DETROIT l967 Troops Army battles African Americans, 43 killed. UNITED STATES l968 Troops After King is shot; over 21,000 soldiers in cities. CAMBODIA l969-75 Bombing, troops, naval Up to 2 million killed in decade of bombing, starvation, and political chaos. OMAN l970 Command operation U.S. directs Iranian marine invasion. LAOS l971-73 Command operation, bombing U.S. directs South Vietnamese invasion; "carpet-bombs" countryside. SOUTH DAKOTA l973 Command operation Army directs Wounded Knee siege of Lakotas. MIDEAST 1973 Nuclear threat World-wide alert during Mideast War. CHILE 1973 Command operation CIA-backed coup ousts elected marxist president. CAMBODIA l975 Troops, bombing Gas captured ship, 28 die in copter crash. ANGOLA l976-92 Command operation CIA assists South African-backed rebels. IRAN l980 Troops, nuclear threat, aborted bo
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/04/2009 @ 10:55pm
mbing Raid to rescue Embassy hostages; 8 troops die in copter-plane crash. Soviets warned not to get involved in revolution. LIBYA l981 Naval jets Two Libyan jets shot down in maneuvers. EL SALVADOR l981-92 Command operation, troops Advisors, overflights aid anti-rebel war, soldiers briefly involved in hostage clash. NICARAGUA l981-90 Command operation, naval CIA directs exile (Contra) invasions, plants harbor mines against revolution. LEBANON l982-84 Naval, bombing, troops Marines expel PLO and back Phalangists, Navy bombs and shells Muslim positions. GRENADA l983-84 Troops, bombing Invasion four years after revolution. HONDURAS l983-89 Troops Maneuvers help build bases near borders. IRAN l984 Jets Two Iranian jets shot down over Persian Gulf. LIBYA l986 Bombing, naval Air strikes to topple nationalist gov't. BOLIVIA 1986 Troops Army assists raids on cocaine region. IRAN l987-88 Naval, bombing US intervenes on side of Iraq in war. LIBYA 1989 Naval jets Two Libyan jets shot down. VIRGIN ISLANDS 1989 Troops St. Croix Black unrest after storm. PHILIPPINES 1989 Jets Air cover provided for government against coup. PANAMA 1989 (-?) Troops, bombing Nationalist government ousted by 27,000 soldiers, leaders arrested, 2000+ killed. LIBERIA 1990 Troops Foreigners evacuated during civil war. SAUDI ARABIA 1990-91 Troops, jets Iraq countered after invading Kuwait. 540,000 troops also stationed in Oman, Qatar, Bahrain, UAE, Israel. IRAQ 1990-? Bombing, troops, naval Blockade of Iraqi and Jordanian ports, air strikes; 200,000+ killed in invasion of Iraq and Kuwait; no-fly zone over Kurdish north, Shiite south, large-scale destruction of Iraqi military. KUWAIT 1991 Naval, bombing, troops Kuwait royal family returned to throne. LOS ANGELES 1992 Troops Army, Marines deployed against anti
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/04/2009 @ 10:55pm
police uprising. SOMALIA 1992-94 Troops, naval, bombing U.S.-led United Nations occupation during civil war; raids against one Mogadishu faction. YUGOSLAVIA 1992-94 Naval NATO blockade of Serbia and Montenegro. BOSNIA 1993-? Jets, bombing No-fly zone patrolled in civil war; downed jets, bombed Serbs. HAITI 1994 Troops, naval Blockade against military government; troops restore President Aristide to office three years after coup. ZAIRE (CONGO) 1996-97 Troops Marines at Rwandan Hutu refugee camps, in area where Congo revolution begins. LIBERIA 1997 Troops Soldiers under fire during evacuation of foreigners. ALBANIA 1997 Troops Soldiers under fire during evacuation of foreigners. SUDAN 1998 Missiles Attack on pharmaceutical plant alleged to be "terrorist" nerve gas plant. AFGHANISTAN 1998 Missiles Attack on former CIA training camps used by Islamic fundamentalist groups alleged to have attacked embassies. IRAQ 1998-? Bombing, Missiles Four days of intensive air strikes after weapons inspectors allege Iraqi obstructions. YUGOSLAVIA 1999 Bombing, Missiles Heavy NATO air strikes after Serbia declines to withdraw from Kosovo. NATO occupation of Kosovo. YEMEN 2000 Naval USS Cole, docked in Aden, bombed. MACEDONIA 2001 Troops NATO forces deployed to move and disarm Albanian rebels. UNITED STATES 2001 Jets, naval Reaction to hijacker attacks on New York, DC AFGHANISTAN 2001-? Troops, bombing, missiles Massive U.S. mobilization to overthrow Taliban, hunt Al Qaeda fighters, install Karzai regime, and battle Taliban insurgency. More than 30,000 U.S. troops and numerous private security contractors carry our occupation. YEMEN 2002 Missiles Predator drone missile attack on Al Qaeda, including a US citizen. PHILIPPINES 2002-? Troops, naval Training mission for Philippine military fight
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/04/2009 @ 10:55pm
ing Abu Sayyaf rebels evolves into combat missions in Sulu Archipelago, west of Mindanao. COLOMBIA 2003-? Troops US special forces sent to rebel zone to back up Colombian military protecting oil pipeline. IRAQ 2003-? Troops, naval, bombing, missiles Saddam regime toppled in Baghdad. More than 250,000 U.S. personnel participate in invasion. US and UK forces occupy country and battle Sunni and Shi'ite insurgencies. More than 160,000 troops and numerous private contractors carry out occupation and build large permanent bases. LIBERIA 2003 Troops Brief involvement in peacekeeping force as rebels drove out leader. HAITI 2004-05 Troops, naval Marines land after right-wing rebels oust elected President Aristide, who was advised to leave by Washington. PAKISTAN 2005-? Missiles, bombing, covert operation CIA missile and air strikes and Special Forces raids on alleged Al Qaeda and Taliban refuge villages kill multiple civilians. SOMALIA 2006-? Missiles, naval, covert operation Special Forces advise Ethiopian invasion that topples Islamist government; AC-130 strikes and Cruise missile attacks against Islamist rebels; naval blockade against "pirates" and insurgents. SYRIA 2008 Troops Special Forces in helicopter raid 5 miles from Iraq kill 8 Syrian civilians
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/04/2009 @ 10:55pm
eh!
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/04/2009 @ 10:57pm
here come the cluster bombs!
larry's pension cheque is safe and sound.
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/04/2009 @ 10:58pm
but sjchermak,
you are racist against canadians!
here's one you sent on a nice vacation:
http://media.canada.com/22892dfb-fb17
-4433-9bc6-5bb0f74689ad/canadaarar.jpg
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/04/2009 @ 11:01pm
happy,
por favor.
that's like saying "i've never felt better" because you were on heroin.
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/04/2009 @ 11:23pm
Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 4:35pm
"your smear of Obama would have made Goebbels proud. Cheney too. you're a phony."
You didn't want to take my suggestion of a few days ago first to draw a tub of hot water and then to start out in search of something sharp, emshlemeil? There's always turning on the gas, you know, or self-defenestration. Perhaps your choice of this latter would appeal to most here. When you failed to post there'd be the entertainment value involved in imagining you trying to fly.
Posted by john lowell at 01/04/2009 @ 11:27pm
frosty,
Excellent post, frosty.
You have proven your point. I am racist against Canadians, because I sent ???? on a nice vacation.
I sent?
I don't have any idea who the person is that you provided a link to (his picture).
How can I send somebody on a vacation when I do not know who they are?
Posted by sjchermak at 01/04/2009 @ 11:31pm
Posted by sjchermak at 01/04/2009 @ 6:30pm
Cross your legs, your breathe smells.
Posted by john lowell at 01/04/2009 @ 11:31pm
trying to stop war is like trying to stop glaciers.
thank you mr. vonnegut.
class dismissed.
Posted by urmygyro at 01/04/2009 @ 11:37pm
emile duBois,
I guess you and I are both finding that if we question what john lowell says, some nasty stuff comes back.
You and I disagree about a lot, but we argue logic and facts back and forth, but john lowell just hurls insults at us when he is not insulting others, including Dick Cheney and Barack Obama.
I guess he is a miserable guy, 24/7.
Posted by sjchermak at 01/04/2009 @ 11:38pm
I fear the leaders in the middle east will tell Obama to go fuck himself just as they have the past few decades.
Posted by bleedingheart at 01/04/2009 @ 11:40pm
frosty zoom,
You have taken great effort to catalog all the wrong you think America is guilty of.
Since you believe yourself to be an arbiter of right and wrong, along with the apparent ability to do things that are right,
And since among all the locations where you said wrong occurred you included Detroit,
And since Detroit could use your help: The City Where the Sirens Never Sleep Detroit is dying. But, it is not dead yet. by Matt Labash 12/29/2008, Volume 014, Issue 15 http://www.weeklystandard.com/ Content/Public/Articles/ 000/000/015/945aynyk.asp
Then, why not hop over the bridge from Windsor and give Detroit a hand?
Posted by sjchermak at 01/04/2009 @ 11:44pm
Sjchermak --- Actually, it has been firmly established in diplomatic history that the atomic bombs dropped on undefended cites (the greatest war crime in history) were militarily unnecessary. Japan was trying to surrender, if only the emporer could remain on his throne. The U.S. rejected this demand because the U.S. wanted to use the atomic bomb for scientific (monstrous) reasons. And to send a message to the Soviets.( And after the war, the emporer WAS allowed to remain on the throne.) But my point of the reference is to show the similarity between Israel and the U.S. in their willingness to commit heinous war crimes and their cold disregard for civilian deaths.
Posted by philbq at 01/05/2009 @ 12:01am
Posted by sjchermak at 01/04/2009 @ 11:38pm
Aw, poor baby. Can it be that I've offended your exquisitely delicate sensibilities? A change of emetics might help, or lacking that, simply bending over and cracking a smile.
Posted by john lowell at 01/05/2009 @ 12:09am
Frosty needs a real job. Cut and paste are ridiculous. A job for Frosty would take some pressure off his fellow Canucks who are carrying him while he shits on his American cousins as tho they are the worst thing to hit mankind I think cut and pasting is the worst thing to hit mankind.
Posted by YourJomamma at 01/05/2009 @ 12:13am
By the way, Sjchermak, please don't cite anything to me from the Weekly Standard...you may as well quote FOX News.
Posted by philbq at 01/05/2009 @ 12:20am
trying to stop war is like trying to stop glaciers.
thank you mr. vonnegut.
class dismissed.
Posted by urmygyro at 01/04/2009 @ 11:37pm
actually,
we're doing a pretty good job stopping glaciers.
so i guess there's hope, after all.
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/05/2009 @ 12:20am
How can I send somebody on a vacation when I do not know who they are?
Posted by sjchermak at 01/04/2009 @ 11:31pm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maher_Arar
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/05/2009 @ 12:21am
I fear the leaders in the middle east will tell Obama to go fuck himself just as they have the past few decades.
Posted by bleedingheart at 01/04/2009 @ 11:40pm
how would they have known him?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syntax
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/05/2009 @ 12:23am
You have taken great effort to catalog all the wrong you think America is guilty of.
•• actually, you can just go here:
http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz/interventions.html
Since you believe yourself to be an arbiter of right and wrong,
•• isn't that what god has asked us to do?
along with the apparent ability to do things that are right,
•• and left.
And since among all the locations where you said wrong occurred you included Detroit,
•• how can you abandon your nation's liver?
And since Detroit could use your help:
•• imagine, just imagine OPERATION GIMME OIL's dollaritos invested in detroit
The City Where the Sirens Never Sleep Detroit is dying.
•• who's killing it?
But, it is not dead yet.
•• nope. 'cept the lions. can you believe the gall of matt millen?!?
by Matt Labash 12/29/2008, Volume 014, Issue 15 http://www.weeklystandard.com/ Content/Public/Articles/ 000/000/015/945aynyk.asp
•• weakkneed standard?!>!>?
Then, why not hop over the bridge from Windsor and give Detroit a hand?
•• why not stop wishing death upon so many?
Posted by sjchermak at 01/04/2009 @ 11:44pm
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/05/2009 @ 12:29am
Posted by john lowell at 01/05/2009 @ 12:09am
you are odd.
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/05/2009 @ 12:30am
Most of FZ's "great effort" are actually spent on catalogging all the wrongs of.......drum roll....STUPID HUMANS.....and STUPID Americans are but a tiny sliver of all STUPID HUMANS....:)
Posted by HAPPYLonghorn at 01/05/2009 @ 12:12am
that's right.
america's all right by me. great people.
but what people can be found guilty for the sins of their "government"?
i just wish "america" would start listening to its heart instead of its pancreas.
i imagine mr. sjchermak believes i hate america. far from it.
if my best friend is being a jerk, i let him know.
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/05/2009 @ 12:34am
Frosty needs a real job.
•• cog #14,5344,334,,433,4432 reporting for duty!
Cut and paste are ridiculous.
•• scroll bar gettin' heavy?
A job for Frosty would take some pressure off his fellow Canucks
•• off to wal-mart first thing tomorrow!
who are carrying him
•• i wish they'd stop squeezing my butt.
while he shits on his American cousins
•• this is a very lame. you have no idea what "america" means. to you, it's just an excuse to make "money".
as tho they are the worst thing to hit mankind
•• i've spoken of a government. do you feel you are "represented"? do you?
I think cut and pasting is the worst thing to hit mankind.
•• especially when the facts are ugly.
Posted by JohnMaasch at 01/05/2009 @ 12:13am
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/05/2009 @ 12:41am
The editor of the Weekly Standard, Michael Golbfarb, recently commented that dropping a 2000lb bomb on the Hamas leader and killing 18 people, including his wife and children, would send a useful message to Hamas leaders. That is an example of state terrorism, which Israel is using every day that the bombing goes on. Like the U.S. used in the carpet bombings of Tokyo.
Posted by philbq at 01/05/2009 @ 12:43am
"the rest of the world see us as bad as Israel as we condone eveything they do" (Caj).
I may go one step further: I see the US as THE problem. Israel has us in the palm of its hand, and this will not change. I recall the video of Lee Hamilton interrupting a member of the press attending the 9/11 Commission (what a laugh that was!)when it was asked "When is the US going to stop its unilateral unconditional support of Israel in view of the fact that this was the stated reason for the motivation of the 9/11 hyjackers? Hamilton was a disgrace and traitor to this country. Obama has not even been asked that question, nor has he volunteered an answer.Israel was founded, funded and functions to this day by a band of mafiosa-like thugs and terrorists, but America allows it to do so.And we the people of the US have been harmed--on 9/11 especially--by this self destructve policy.But then the US has supported every right wing dictatorship in the world since WWII.And not too many people know that Israel has and is arming Mugabe in Zimbabwe. Birds of a feather.
Posted by mystic7 at 01/05/2009 @ 12:44am
Stlll trying to figure out why we wasted so many valuable American lives and our resourses saving 100s of millions of Europeons, billions of Asians and others during WWI and WWII?
•• a noble effort. equalled by many people of many nations.
We would be a much richer
•• oooh, goody!
and surely a more dominant world power
•• wouldn't you rather be nice and helpful?
if we just let them kill each other off!
•• may i remind you that you use the moniker "comanchenation". ponder that for a while.
Let's go Swiss for 100yrs. and see what happens?
•• oh, right. you gonna learn 3 languages?
Posted by comanchenation at 01/05/2009 @ 12:26am
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/05/2009 @ 12:45am
Come to think of it I think we wasted some American lives on Canadians who were fighting with the Brits in both WWI and WWII, but they are good neighbors usually Frosty!
Posted by comanchenation at 01/05/2009 @ 12:40am
of course we are, brother rio.
don't forget the wasted lives of canadians lost in the folly of afghanistan.
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/05/2009 @ 12:49am
It was a ONETHOUSAND pound bomb! Why do leftist sympathizers have to LIE about everything?
Posted by comanchenation at 01/05/2009 @ 12:47am
rio,
would you give up your home if you were told by the "authorities" that the comanche nation were returning to their homeland and that you would be relocated to a refugee camp in arkansas?
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/05/2009 @ 12:51am
"..(the US atomic bomb attack on Japan) shows the similarity between Israel and the U.S. in their willingness to commit heinous war crimes" (philbq)
Spot on. Neither cares about the sanctity of human life whatsoever.The Talmud sanctions murder with impunity, as long as the victims are not Jewish.I bitterly regret coming to the US 40 years ago, the biggest mistake of my life. Too old now to leave.
Posted by mystic7 at 01/05/2009 @ 12:53am
The Weekly Standard story mentioned a 2000 lb bomb. Commanchenutcase, why do you care...it was a large bomb that killed a bad man plus many others including children. Actually, I NEVER lie. The facts are devastating enough to make my points. And ,predictably, the U.S. is blocking any statement from the U.N. Security Council calling for a halt to Israeli military slaughter. The U.S. wants Israel to continue its war crimes.
Posted by philbq at 01/05/2009 @ 12:59am
would you let the comanche have their land back?
yes or no?
would you leave?
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/05/2009 @ 01:04am
should the susquehannock be given washington d.c. back?
oh wait. they were all killed.
oh well.
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/05/2009 @ 01:06am
Let's hypothetically reverse the situation on the ground in Gaza. Let's assume that the Jews were at the receiving end by Palestinian F-16s in Gaza. Let's, further, assume that Palestinians murdered over 500 Jews and wounded over 2700 in seven days in Gaza, mostly civilians and children. 1. Obama would have interrupted his Hawaiian vacation and rushed back to Washington. He would declare that being silent about murdering innocent Jews is morally reprehensible. He would urge President Bush to place the resources of the US at Israel's disposal to lift the Palestinian siege of the Jews in Gaza. 2. Congress members would have interrupted their break and rushed back to Washington to convene an emergency session. 99 Senators and 422 Congressmen, across party line, would have signed a resolution asking the President to immediately dispatch our Marines to break the Palestinian siege of Gaza. Congress would pass resolutions to freeze all Palestinian assets in American banks and enacts an economic and military embargo to punish nations that supply arms to the Palestinians. Congress would further deem the Palestinians in violation of the Arms Export Control Act for using American made F-16s to kill civilians. 3. The Secretary of State to be, Hillary Clinton, would hold a press conference and call for the obliteration of the Palestinians 4. The American mainstream media would play the murdering of Jews in Gaza 24 hour a day, uninterrupted. They will show the savagely torn bodies of Jewish kids and their wailing mothers and their funerals, play-by-play.
Well, Ladies and Gentlemen, the Israelis have just murdered 506 Palestinians and wounded over 2700 in Gaza, after they starved them for six months. America was kept silent and in the dark about this crime by the Israeli Lobby.
Posted by CripThink at 01/05/2009 @ 04:30am
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/05/2009 @ 12:30am
Think you might fit a small object like your head into that very large hole in your hind quarters, putz? Try and if your having trouble report back. We'll have some further helpful hints.
Posted by john lowell at 01/05/2009 @ 06:17am
Am I alone, or are others sceptical that Obama will change our destructive foreign policy...? For reasons unknown, we continue to support repressive, reactionary countries despite our much lauded and overstated love of 'freedom and democracy' (rapidly disappearing).
Posted by tea at 01/05/2009 @ 07:05am
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/05/2009 @ 12:30am
I think given the exact "focus" of his insults, he has some "issues"...of the "Larry Craig" nature, yet to be resolved.
Posted by Mask at 01/05/2009 @ 07:16am
When Obama is silent during the Israeli onslaught, it is the silence of the lambs.
Posted by philbq at 01/05/2009 @ 07:24am
Go, Israel.
Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 01/05/2009 @ 08:04am
The brief Hiroshima discussion prompts the (for me) eternal question, "Why didn't they drop it on Nijima (an island a few miles outside of Tokyo Bay)?" It would have had the same political effect. But no, we incinerated 200,000 in a spirit of great anger and violence and militaristic disregard of innocent, average people, just as the Israelis commit the excesses they do today. Someone please tell me of an instance in human history where, in the rage of war, someone thought outside the box in the name of human decency. I'm sure there are examples. But this example I present of a "demonstration" detonation on Niijima should be taken as a symbol of the possibility that always exists of stepping back from extreme actions. The invasion and devastation of Iraq is another example of a Hiroshima mentality, where the attack should have fallen on Bin Laden.
How inexpensive it would be for the U.S. and the European powers to rein in Israeli rage, to lend sustenance to the Palestinians, build up their infrastructures, etc. ( instead of, for example obliterating that fine American high school.) It would simply be necessary for Israel to abandon its Biblical fantasies, and for the Arab nations to accept the 60 year-old geopolitical reality of Israel. That this probably cannot occur is a matter of he tremendous influence of the Jewish right in America (I am a Jewish man) and more than that, of the way power moves among men in the world. But it is also the result of - and here I can't help but feel the truth in Syfriendly's words - the deeply hypocritical and racist insensitivity of Americans to the pathetic condition of the 1.5 million people of Gaza.
Posted by litenotheat at 01/05/2009 @ 08:05am
Am I alone, or are others sceptical that Obama will change our destructive foreign policy...? For reasons unknown, we continue to support repressive, reactionary countries despite our much lauded and overstated love of 'freedom and democracy' (rapidly disappearing).
Posted by tea at 01/05/2009 @ 07:05am
No, you are not alone with that idea..I am hoping that PE Obama will change foreign policy, especially with Israel, but from what he has said during the campaign it sounds like it may continue. I'm not in favour of it staying the same at all, it needs changing...as you said so much for our "freedom and democracy".
Posted by Caj at 01/05/2009 @ 08:30am
"In 25 years of working on this issue for six secretaries of state, I can't recall one meeting where we had a serious discussion with an Israeli prime minister about the damage that settlement activity--including land confiscation, bypass roads and housing demolitions--does to the peacemaking process."
aaron david miller
http://www.newsweek.com/id/177716
(Between 1988 and 2003, Miller served six secretaries of state as an advisor on Arab-Israeli negotiations, where he participated in American efforts to broker agreements between Israel, Jordan, Syria, and the Palestinians.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_David_Miller
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/05/2009 @ 09:14am
'If somebody was sending rockets into my house where my daughters sleep at night, I am going to do everything in to my power to stop that. I would expect Israelis to do the same thing.' -- Barack Obama -- http:// transcripts.cnn.com/ TRANSCRIPTS/0812/29/ acd.01.html
Posted by HonestLiberal at 01/05/2009 @ 09:21am
I bitterly regret coming to the US 40 years ago, the biggest mistake of my life. Too old now to leave. Posted by mystic7 at 01/05/2009 @ 12:53am | ignore this person | warn this person
really? background please. where, why, etc.
I too came to the US 46 years ago, from Germany. je regret rien. I regret nothing.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 09:29am
Posted by john lowell at 01/04/2009 @ 11:27pm | ignore this person | warn this person
you are in love with yourself, and act surprised when we don't agree. you are Schmutz. translation, what I scrape off the bottom of my shoes.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 09:35am
and PhillipMcCrevice will remind me that I am an "assclown".
Posted by sjchermak at 01/04/2009 @ 11:44pm
i've been called worse...
what exactly IS an "assclown", anyhoos?
Posted by ibbleblibble at 01/05/2009 @ 09:43am
Tea,
You expected change? You will get change and it will be higher taxes.
You will get more govt spending than even the Nation dreamed.
You will get more govt in your life.
You will get more govt workers, unionized up your ass.
You will get higher costs, more regs that will hurt you, and more beurocratic obstcales that will slow down efficiency even more and you will get more guys standing around watching the one guy work the shovel.
Another change will be the guys who make the econoy grow will pull back and revenues fall, so of course the govt, rather than cut back, will come looking for more money and will find..... You
Enjoy the change... It is all you will be left with whenthe new day is done.
Go Israel.
Posted by YourJomamma at 01/05/2009 @ 09:45am
Hers to LITENOTHEAT; a Jewish man who is not an apologist for Israeli imperialism, and has sympathy for the slaughter of Palestinians. Unfortunately, the Zionist Jewish rightwing Likudites (many of which are very wealthy)controlthe White House, 98%of Congress, the corporate media, and the entertainment business. So no criticism of Israel is allowed. Only pro-Israel guests are allowed on talk shows. AIPAC controls the politicians. The U.S. blocks the U.N. Security Council from any statement urging Israel to stop the killing. So the killing goes on.
Posted by philbq at 01/05/2009 @ 10:02am
It's amazing how Hamas is a terrorist Organization but Israel starving people into submission isn't considered a terrorist act?????? I find myself wondering if there is anything Israel can do that will make all these sycophant Christian's in our country finally condemn them as evil. We only defend the criminal Israel because of religion. They are supposedly 'God's Chosen People'! Which a lot of us don't buy to begin with. If anyone else in this world was pulling the stunt Israel is we would cut off all aid to them and declare them a terrorist nation instantly. Good old George might even invade them because they are a threat to international peace. We wonder why Arabs hate us???? Why they are determined to destroy us??? When we allow Israel to terrorize Arabs. And our criminal President even encourages it.
Posted by ganddw42 at 01/05/2009 @ 10:04am
Posted by YourJomamma at 01/05/2009 @ 09:45am
Why do I suspect that you said the EXACT same thing ...in January 1993?
Posted by Mask at 01/05/2009 @ 10:10am
We wonder why Arabs hate us???? Why they are determined to destroy us??? When we allow Israel to terrorize Arabs. And our criminal President even encourages it.
Posted by ganddw42 at 01/05/2009 @ 10:04am |
My sentiments exactly...total amazment at how the US have not got enough guts to stand up to Israel!
Posted by Caj at 01/05/2009 @ 10:12am
hamas keeps lobbing rockets into israel. how do folks suggest israel deal with this? any ideas?
Posted by ibbleblibble at 01/05/2009 @ 10:15am
hamas keeps lobbing rockets
lobbing sounds so nice, like kids playing.
starting a war they are bound to lose badly, is an old arab strategy. the'67 war was the same story. they had no chance to win anything, yet they went ahead,hoping to turn world opinion.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 10:28am
Why do I suspect that you said the EXACT same thing ...in January 1993?
Posted by Mask at 01/05/2009 @ 10:10am
Yes, some of those things I did say and they came true.. Some of the things I didn't say came through anyway..and the rest is history..and 1994 Congress was the reaction.
But what I said here is base on the change that was promise..my list is not speculation, but rather what the incoming govt said it will do.
It is based on THEIR WORDS, NOT MINE.
Posted by YourJomamma at 01/05/2009 @ 10:35am
you don't know what you are talking about. Jews were promised a home land in 1917. Posted by emile duBois at 01/04/2009 @ 6:05pm |
So that's when the Torah was written.
Posted by sloper at 01/05/2009 @ 10:35am
hamas keeps lobbing rockets into israel. how do folks suggest israel deal with this? any ideas?
Posted by ibbleblibble at 01/05/2009 @ 10:15am
Yes, Israel get the hell out of Gaza!
Posted by Caj at 01/05/2009 @ 10:36am
hamas keeps lobbing rockets into israel. how do folks suggest israel deal with this? any ideas?
Posted by ibbleblibble at 01/05/2009 @ 10:15am
Yes, Israel get the hell out of Gaza!
Posted by Caj at 01/05/2009 @ 10:36am
OR.....get HAMAS the hell out of Gaza and see what happens.
Just a wild guess here, but if rockets stop firing into Israel FROM Gaza, maybe something different can take place...
Since this tact has NEVER been tried...Lets try it!!!
Posted by YourJomamma at 01/05/2009 @ 10:50am
ibbleblibble,
1. You will have to ask PhilMcCrevice what an assclown is. He seems to be the one to have invented the term.
2. You ask "hamas keeps lobbing rockets into israel. how do folks suggest israel deal with this? any ideas?"
Yes, I have an idea. Israel should completely crush and destroy Hamas. Israel needs to make it so there is no more Hamas.
Posted by sjchermak at 01/05/2009 @ 10:52am
philbq,
You said above "Sjchermak --- Actually, it has been firmly established in diplomatic history that the atomic bombs dropped on undefended cites (the greatest war crime in history) were militarily unnecessary....."
We went through this, above, already.
The comparison of the articles I posted above show that this contention is not true. "It" has not been "firmly established"
You are just re-stating your opinion, posturing it as absolute fact, without providing any support for it, or refutation of the Weekly Standard article.
Also, you request I not cite the Weekly Standard as a source.
1. That tactic doesn't fly, anymore. This gets absurd, some on this site declare some sources off limits. I told you that the Weekly Standard article goes into depth about the Hiroshima issue, and does not get into a political discussion. You have no basis for declaring it is not a valid source.
2. It is no suprise that some on this site declare certain sources "off limits", because some of those sources prove them (the people setting the ground rules that sources are off limits) wrong.
Posted by sjchermak at 01/05/2009 @ 10:59am
Just a wild guess here, but if rockets stop firing into Israel FROM Gaza, maybe something different can take place...
Since this tact has NEVER been tried...Lets try it!!!
Posted by YourJomamma at 01/05/2009 @ 10:50am
And just maybe if Israel didn't drop bombs from planes and send in tanks to occupy the people in Gaza....Hamas would not have a reason to do so. "Just a wild guess"!!! There are two sides to every coin here and it's not just the plight of Israel, which is the only one the US cares about.
Posted by Caj at 01/05/2009 @ 11:02am
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 09:35am
"you are in love with yourself, and act surprised when we don't agree. you are Schmutz. translation, what I scrape off the bottom of my shoes."
Just leave all that in the suicide note, emile. That way I'll get credit for having made the suggestion.
Posted by john lowell at 01/05/2009 @ 11:05am
So that's when the Torah was written. Posted by sloper at 01/05/2009 @ 10:35am | ignore this person | warn this person
no, the Balfour declaration, the FIRST Balfour declaration to be precise.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 11:06am
Posted by sjchermak at 01/05/2009 @ 10:59am | ignore this person | warn this person
it's not that the weekly standard is off limits, it's that they have no credibility.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 11:08am
the Hiroshima issue, and does not get into a political discussion.
impossible. it is and will always be a political issue.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 11:09am
Posted by john lowell at 01/05/2009 @ 11:05am | ignore this person | warn this person
you don't really have anything to say, do you. and you're not very smart, are you?
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 11:10am
Get em emile!
Posted by Benchrest at 01/05/2009 @ 11:12am
Yes, I have an idea. Israel should completely crush and destroy Hamas. Israel needs to make it so there is no more Hamas.
Posted by sjchermak at 01/05/2009 @ 10:52am
Israel are the ones who need crushing with their insidious behaviour..how anyone see them as so blame free in all this is totally beyond me. They aren't defending themselves so much as completely trying to destroy Gaza and it's people. Poor, poor Israel with all it's military might and little Gaza with some ground rockets for protection...no contest who the biggest aggressor is here!!!
Posted by Caj at 01/05/2009 @ 11:16am
little Gaza with some ground rockets for protection..
yes, the rockets are for defensive purposes only. you are a joke.
Hamas would be happy to kill 500 Israelis. they have never denied it.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 11:24am
.how anyone see them as so blame free in all this is totally beyond me.
very few here hold this view. you on the other hand, are incapable of seeing both sides of this tragic story.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 11:26am
very few here hold this view. you on the other hand, are incapable of seeing both sides of this tragic story.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 11:26am
There are two sides here and death and destruction on both that is right...you cannot equate the military might of Israel compared to Palestine, I don't care what reason you come up with....there is no comparison!!! Israel are the biggest aggressor's in this conflict whether you like it or not.
Posted by Caj at 01/05/2009 @ 11:39am
CAJ Let me get this straight. The Air & Armour Assault began BEFORE or AFTER the harrassment rocket attacks?? (again)
Why is a response to aggression always regarded as a crime if it comes from the more powerful.
You no doubt think the British were at fault for retaking the Falklands in the face of Argentinian aggression back in '82.
Do you realize that when the Palestinians finally learn how to AIM their rockets instead of just flinging them up like Roman candles and hoping to kill someone, (which will not be far off) they will have the range to reach Israels nuclear facilities?
Do you really believe Israel can wait for that?
How much crap can be allowed to be dished out before it's OK for the other guy to finally get pissed off?
Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 01/05/2009 @ 11:45am
How much crap can be allowed to be dished out before it's OK for the other guy to finally get pissed off?
Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 01/05/2009
If you have to fight at least make the fight fair...you obviously see Israel as equal to Palestine in their weaponry!!! As for firing rockets straight what a load of nonsense...like Israel GUIDE their missiles SO carefully when they drop from planes I suppose!! I wonder how you would feel if an outside force surrounded your State and trapped you in...I guess you would just sit back and take it would you? Israel are just a bullies of the Middle East and those who condone their actions are sad.
Posted by Caj at 01/05/2009 @ 11:54am
syfriendly: You simply are blind to the reality of the existence of Israel and the right of Israel to exist. The Palestinians are responsible for their own problems but instead of actually trying solving them, they try to play the victim role to gain sympathy. No Arab country wants the Palestinians to have their own independent state, otherwise they would have it on the West Bank for starters. Instead of making something of the Gaza opportunity given them by the pull-out of Israel and all its settlements in 2005, the Palestinian's first act, acting like barbarians, was to destory a well established series of greenhouses left behind by Israel. That is followed by the election of the bloodthirsty gouls of Hamas to represent them. Having zero experience in actually running a government, Hamas turned Gaza into an even more worthless pit. Now the best solution is to have Egypt assume control and security of Gaza but they don't want it either - I wonder why. Basically the Palestinians are being abused by the likes of Iran for supporting the vermin Hamas.
Posted by pyeatte at 01/05/2009 @ 11:55am
Posted by Caj at 01/05/2009 @ 11:39am | ignore this person | warn this person
I believe we were discussing blame, not the size of the military.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 11:56am
In the quote you present, Bush says that a cease-fire that allows Hamas to continue launching rocket attacks is not acceptable and asks for monitoring mechanisms. I don't see how taking this position is a war-crime.
Posted by Pancho at 01/05/2009 @ 11:57am
Yes, my friend, simply monitoring, not moved-by or horrified-by events in Gaza. This affectless filth continues to do the bidding of those that have purchased him while kids die. But, then again, when did Obama ever have much interest in saving the lives of little children?
Here's a link that just might interest you. Let me know your impressions:
http://www.counterpunch.org/whitney12312008.html
Posted by john lowell at 01/04/2009 @ 4:15pm | warn this person
Thanks for the link JL - a good read. Silence speaks volumes doesn't it? Funny, BO feels that he can chime in on all sorts of issues besides this. Couldn't help but notice the similarity in names -- Barack and Barak -- (Israel Defense Minister). Audacity of Hope indeed....BO has restored traditional meaning to this phrase. It is AUDACIOUS to hope that we are going to get any real change.
Posted by OneVote at 01/05/2009 @ 11:59am
CAJ CAJ, you're missing my point about the precision weapons.
And regarding military parity, yes I know Israel far exceeds the Palestinians in all types of weaponry. I also know an old 2.75" rocket fired indicriminately will tear a kids arm off just as easily as an HE round from a tank, so, no sympathy there.
I was taught when you know you're going to have a fight you hit and hit hard. Firing missles at each other round for round is a sure way to sustain the war forever. I hope Israel uses its superior force to CRUSH the terrorists and their whole infrastucture, the more disproportionately the better. Then maybe the fighting will stop.
The only war crime here is the cowardly behavior of Hamas to embedd themselves with their own people so its impossible to finish them with killing innocents.
Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 01/05/2009 @ 12:04pm
Yes, I have an idea. Israel should completely crush and destroy Hamas. Israel needs to make it so there is no more Hamas.----Posted by sjchermak at 01/05/2009 @ 10:52am
How?....exactly...in detail.
Posted by Mask at 01/05/2009 @ 12:15pm
US to sell bunker-busting bombs to Israel: Pentagon Sep 16, 2008
WASHINGTON (AFP) -- The US Defense Department has notified Congress of plans to sell 1,000 bunker-buster bombs to Israel in a deal worth 77 million dollars.
The Defense Security Cooperation Agency announced the possible arms sale of the GBU-39 small diameter smart bombs on its website. The deal still requires approval from Congress.
The bombs, which are touted as more precise than larger munitions, have the capacity to penetrate 1.8 meters (six feet) of reinforced concrete and carry a 50 percent probability of reaching a target within five meters.
According to the Jerusalem Post, the bombs could help Israel in a possible strike against Iran's nuclear sites, some of which are protected by bunker-like structures.
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jGm4IlFB_5Jfw0zKBttlntWFmwAQ
Newser) - The new low-cost, high-precision missiles Israel has been using to bombard Gaza were purchased recently from the United States, the Jerusalem Post reports. In September, the Israel Air Force purchased 1,000 units of the GBU-39, a bunker-buster missile whose small diameter helps minimize collateral damage, earning it a rep as one of the most accurate bombs in the world.
http://www.newser.com/tag/34871/1/bunker-busting-bombs.html
Posted by OneVote at 01/05/2009 @ 12:23pm
Mask,
You ask "How?....exactly...in detail."
Mask, I don't know because I am not in the IDF. If I were, then I most likely would not be in a position to tell you anyway. So I will leave it up to the IDF.
If and when they are able to defeat Hamas, then we will both know.
Posted by sjchermak at 01/05/2009 @ 12:26pm
Yes, I have an idea. Israel should completely crush and destroy Hamas. Israel needs to make it so there is no more Hamas.
Posted by sjchermak at 01/05/2009 @ 10:52am | ignore this person | warn this person
seems that is what they are determined to do.
and i blame hamas.
Posted by ibbleblibble at 01/05/2009 @ 12:26pm
emile,
You say "it's not that the weekly standard is off limits, it's that they have no credibility."
Why? Outline for me why.
Also, do you contend the article I posted the link to is not credible? If so, why? What are your arguments refuting it?
You mention that Hiroshima is and will always be a political issue.
Yes, it has become a political issue. What I said and meant is that the referenced articles did not get into political aspects (aspects back then or current aspects). The articles discussed what was happening then, from ending the war viewpoint, the overtures for peace that were said to be occurring, the question of whether Truman was trying to intimidate the Soviets, the question of whether Japan was about to surrender or not, the building up that Japan was doing in the areas they believed would be invaded, if there were to be an invasion, the cost in lives of the invasion, the question of whether a war weary America could stand the massive casualties of an invasion, the credibility of the information on Japan's intentions and how that information was discovered and interpreted, the question of how and why facts bearing on this were not made public, etc.
Some of this (the reaction of war weary America and the reaction of the Soviets) could be construed as being political considerations.
But when I refer to politics I was referring to current day Right vs Left argumentation, and how the Left holds this up as an example of American "wrong". And those considerations are not really a part of any of those articles.
Posted by sjchermak at 01/05/2009 @ 12:35pm
Yes, Israel get the hell out of Gaza!
Posted by Caj at 01/05/2009 @ 10:36am | ignore this person | warn this person
build a gigantic wass around it first. i still gotta think hamas or some such group would continue lobbing rockets and the whole crap would begin again.
but worth a try.
---------------------------------------
Since this tact has NEVER been tried...Lets try it!!!
Posted by YourJomamma at 01/05/2009 @ 10:50am | ignore this person | warn this person
great minds think alike...at least sometimes!!!
lol...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 01/05/2009 @ 12:41pm
Little known facts: (1) Israel has and is arming the brutal Mugabe in Zimbabwe; That shows you how it doesn't give a s*t about human life and only wants money; That's despicable; (2)Some of the billions we American taxpayers just hand over to Israel unconditionally every year is not only used in supportingg themperpetrating genocide,using cluster bombs and other illegal weaponry, but is also used for welfare for the rabbis who are allowed not to fight in the military, but also for WELFARE to support them staying home and praying to god to continue supporting them with money.We have a depression and, evenb if it was warranted, which it is not, this madness should stop immediately.
Posted by mystic7 at 01/05/2009 @ 12:43pm
gigantic waLL
jeez...sometimes my dyslexic brainfarts take me aback, even...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 01/05/2009 @ 12:44pm
the weekly standard is the house organ for neo cons, who also have lost all credibility.
the TWO atomic bombs were a political issue then and they are so now.
you seem to think that the weekly standard is the final word on this issue. that is certainly not the case.
Japan was completely destroyed. the problem was the phrase"unconditional surrender". once the japanese were assured that their emperor would not be touched, they surrendered. had this assurance come before the nuke attacks, they would have surrendered. without that assurance, the US could have dropped ten nukes, the nation of japan would have committed suicide, rather than surrender.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 12:45pm
Yes, Israel get the hell out of Gaza!
well, actually they had, and took their settlers with them. what did it get them? more rocket attacks.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 12:47pm
Posted by mystic7 at 01/05/2009 @ 12:43pm | ignore this person | warn this person
nonsense. american foreign aid is almost always military in nature. to keep those weapons plants here humming.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 12:49pm
it's not that the weekly standard is off limits, it's that they have no credibility.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 11:08am
Not really a legit argument, JR, as it can also be said of the Nation...it is merely your opinion, and one I would hope is formed after actually reading it or the articles in question.
Posted by YourJomamma at 01/05/2009 @ 1:01pm
Caj,
And you would bring a peace sign to the gun fight your neighbor has been wasging against you?
This is precisely why uber libs like you should be placed in charge of...nothing.....especially anything where the military is concerned...you will get us all killed...fairly, of course....
Posted by YourJomamma at 01/05/2009 @ 1:08pm
emile,
The reason I cite the Weekly Standard article about Hiroshima is not because I want it to be the "final word" in and of itself, it comes from reading the article and the other 3 promoting the opposite viewpoint that I also referenced.
The Weekly Standard article says that the preponderance of intelligence information that the US was receiving was indicating that Japan was not about to surrender. It says this based on citing the information, how it was developed, and why it never was made fully public before.
This intelligence information dispelled the notion held by some that Japan was about to surrender, based on the peace overtures going on. It seemed to indicate they were not real.
The article seems to credibly address why some thought peace may have been at hand (and the thoughts of why people believed this mirrors many of the contentions of the other 3 articles I referenced), and it seems to credibly address why this was an illusion.
I am still looking for, and have not gotten since I brought this up yesterday, any refutation of the arguments made in that article. I am just getting back re-statements that Japan was about to surrender.
The other 3 articles, if one were to read them by themselves, seem to make a convincing case that peace was at hand... UNTIL.. one reads the Weekly Standard article which in my opinion credibly refutes those arguments.
Tell me why the contentions in the Weekly Standard article are wrong.. Who has refuted them? ... What are the arguments that have not been addressed by the Weekly Standard article or the other 3.
Tell me WHY you believe the Weekly Standard take is wrong.
And I do not buy into the contention, if it were to be made, that because it is a "neo-con" organ it is not to be believed.
Posted by sjchermak at 01/05/2009 @ 1:19pm
Posted by OneVote at 01/05/2009 @ 11:59am
The Israeli's have just shoved the so-called "peace process" up Obama's wazoo and have dared him to object, which he hasn't the stomach for, of course. And running interference for all of this for the last 30 or 40 years, you named it, AIPAC. These folks do anything they cotton pickin want to do and our political establishment says "yowza, boss". Seventy-one percent of the American people want a balanced Middle Eastern policy, the same seventy-one percent or more that want us out of Iraq, and what do we get, war in Iraq - soon to be war in Afghanstan - and endorsement of Israeli outrages. I don't see that changing short of a popular uprising, frankly. To call our system a functioning democracy is simply absurd on its face.
Posted by john lowell at 01/05/2009 @ 1:27pm
forget the weekly standard. address my points.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 1:27pm
emile duBois: About Japan and the bomb. At that time we only had two bombs, one plutonium and one uranium, and it would have been several more months before we would actually have a continuous production. After the first bomb was dropped, the Japanese military did not want to surrender. We decided we had to drop our second bomb quickly to make the Japanese think we did have a production line going and could keep dropping them. After the second bomb was dropped the military still did not want to surrender but the Emperor said "enough" and overrode the military and surrendered. Had he not done that we would have not been able to drop another thereby demonstrating we did not have a production line. This would have meant invasion and would have cost millions of lives.
Posted by pyeatte at 01/05/2009 @ 1:55pm
Seventy-one percent of the American people want a balanced Middle Eastern policy, the same seventy-one percent or more that want us out of Iraq, and what do we get, war in Iraq - soon to be war in Afghanstan - and endorsement of Israeli outrages. I don't see that changing short of a popular uprising, frankly. To call our system a functioning democracy is simply absurd on its face.
Posted by john lowell at 01/05/2009 @ 1:27pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Clearly, our government does not belong to us anymore. Obviously, it doesn't matter what the electorate wants or needs. Politicians are perfectly free to lie their way into office and maintain corrupt hold of power once there. I don't see any substantial reformation coming from Washington. Our masters don't want to kill the goose that lays the golden egg, but it appears that they have come perilously close. The Federal government is no longer representative of the majority, but in fact a minority of privileged elite, many of whom include AIPAC members. Ben Ginsberg talks of the unholy alliance of established WASP and unsavory Jewish financial interests in Fatal Embrace that has brought us to this place. I believe that if we are to survive, we must return to state's rights and regional alliances within the now "united" States. The consolidation of money and economic interests that have accelerated since Reagan and run rampant under the Bush Clinton inspired economic crisis won't make this movement to restore our republic any easier. It is my hope that this movement can be accomplished peacefully and without backlash from the Federal government. It is my fear that it won't.
Posted by OneVote at 01/05/2009 @ 2:03pm
Posted by sjchermak at 01/05/2009 @ 12:26pm
So basically, you're endorsing a policy you have NO IDEA how to succeed at.
Are you really Dubya?
Posted by Mask at 01/05/2009 @ 2:18pm
Posted by pyeatte at 01/05/2009 @ 1:55pm | ignore this person | warn this person
i never knew one was plutonium. but yeah, that was exactly how it went down.
Posted by ibbleblibble at 01/05/2009 @ 2:19pm
Obama should intervene from the very first days to stop the 'IDF gone wild' movie....Israeli politicians are bleeding USA dry by taking billions in aids and then back stabbing us with their spying activities....
Obama should reign in the neocons...and if Hillary, AIPAC or anyone else have problem with this..they can go relocate....
Posted by freenation at 01/05/2009 @ 2:27pm
emile,
At the end, after the bombs, the Japanese were raising the issue about the emperor. They wanted the the emperor and the system the had prior to the war to remain in place. They made an attempt to push this, the U.S. said no, and then the Japanese surrendered.
The Emperor remained alive and as a figurehead, but it was not what the Japanese really wanted.
After the bombs, they made this one last push for the Emperor and system to remain. This was rejected and they gave up.
If this was rejected prior to the bombs, would they have given up? I don't think so.
Most of the intelligence indicates they were not about to give up.
You say I must address your points.. The only points you have made are that the Japanese were about to give up and they just wanted the Emperor protected. These points made by you with no real support behind them.
It appears from the situation that your contention is not true, that the Japanese did not want to give up at all, and this was only their final position when they realized there was no out anymore. It would appear that much of their government did not come to this conclusion until after the bombs, and even then they tried for more then they ultimately got.
I am supposed to forget the Weekly Standard, but I was not even alive back then to have insight about what the "take" was back then, much less being in a position high in our government to know what was happening. Thus all I can do, and I would assume you also, is read historical accounts and facts.
And I have attempted to be fair minded and review other sources than the Weekly Standard.
It does seem that protecting the Emperor was only the last ditch position of the Japanese, it does not seem the Japanese were about to surrender.
Posted by sjchermak at 01/05/2009 @ 2:34pm
Posted by sjchermak at 01/05/2009 @ 2:34pm | ignore this person | warn this person
in many ways the emperor was indeed a figurehead ruled by a coterie of shogun-like generals and admirals, especially the generals, i think.
the secluded, deific, nature of him pre occupation, served the purposes of the shoguns who used him much like the old shoguns did.
before the war he was a figurehead used by authoritarians and fascist...after a figurehead in a democracy...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 01/05/2009 @ 2:41pm
Mask,
You pose the question "So basically, you're endorsing a policy you have NO IDEA how to succeed at."
Mask, you are arguing for the sake of arguing.
I do not know how to quarterback the Baltimore Ravens to victory in the upcoming Super Bowl this year. So I will leave it up to Joe Flacco to carry out that task, which he will.
I do not know how to scope out the computer software market, develop products that people like, promote them and sell them and design them. So I defer to Bill Gates on that one to provide Microsoft Office.
I do not know how to reform education regarding reading skills of kids - by promoting use of phonics in teaching kids reading as was done in the past - but replaced recently by educators promoting whole language theory resulting in kids reading skills dropping and more illiterate kids - but the trend reversed now with kids being able to read again in some areas by going back to phonics - due to the curiosity and effort of a person in position to make that happen in his state - thus I defer to George W. Bush, who did this successfuly as Governor of Texas, to accomplish that task.
I do not know how to fly an airplane, so whenever I had taken a plane flight I let the captian fly the plane and did not try to give advice.
And, in order to defeat Hamas, it thus makes sense to defer to the IDF.
Posted by sjchermak at 01/05/2009 @ 3:21pm
Posted by OneVote at 01/05/2009 @ 2:03pm
"Our masters don't want to kill the goose that lays the golden egg, but it appears that they have come perilously close."
I'm not so sure that they haven't killed it. A Ponzi economy like ours where the continuous leveredging of debt acting as a stand-in for real wages and coupled with the wholesale loss of industries overseas, a rickety dollar and several trillions in abra-ka-dabra spent in a last, desperation attempt to save zombie banks, failing businesses, and a credit system about which no one is any longer conned, just can't be revived. When all the pain is experienced that will be necessary to wring the lie out of the structures, the people will be ready for something else. I don't look to a restoration but rather to a reconstruction from the ground up, one in which the slime that have governed us, all of them without exception, are brought to account for their self-service.
Posted by john lowell at 01/05/2009 @ 3:24pm
Posted by sjchermak at 01/05/2009 @ 3:21pm
But, the IDF has NEVER "destroyed Hamas"...in fact, it never "destroyed" the PLO.
So is it possible that such a goal (your goal)...isn't possible, even by those who would want it most (the Israelis)???
Posted by Mask at 01/05/2009 @ 3:39pm
At the end, after the bombs, the Japanese were raising the issue about the emperor. They wanted the the emperor and the system the had prior to the war to remain in place. They made an attempt to push this, the U.S. said no, and then the Japanese surrendered. The Emperor remained alive and as a figurehead, but it was not what the Japanese really wanted. After the bombs, they made this one last push for the Emperor and system to remain. This was rejected and they gave up.
none of this is true.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 4:16pm
hus I defer to George W. Bush, who did this successfuly as Governor of Texas, to accomplish that task.
this too has been shown to be a lie.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 4:17pm
Mask,
It is possible if the world stops pressuring for cease fires and artificial "peace" which tie the hands of the Israelis, and enable Hamas to survive and then re-arm and eventually go back to killing Israelis. (i.e., allowing the cycle to continue over and over again).
In my examples above:
1. Bill Gates successfully developed and marketed Microsoft Office.
2. Pilots successfully fly airplanes from point to point each and every day.
3. George W. Bush successfully fixed education (and improved literacy among children, giving them a future), in Texas.
So the IDF CAN successfully defeat Hamas.
And yes, Mask, Joe Flacco and the Ravens will win the Super Bowl, too.
Posted by sjchermak at 01/05/2009 @ 4:20pm
emile,
You say "none of this is true."
Show how. Defend your claim. Re-stating it over and over again is not proof.
Posted by sjchermak at 01/05/2009 @ 4:22pm
the Japanese were about to give up and they just wanted the Emperor protected.
this one is true. they did not surrender UNTIL they received guarantees in regards to the emperor. the emperor was a god like figure to them. the cult of suicide was very strong in Japan.
what was the nuke in a country that was systematically firebombed. far more people perished in the bombing of Tokyo.
they would not have surrendered without the guarantee that the emperor would not be tried for war crimes and executed.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 4:22pm
It would appear that much of their government did not come to this conclusion until after the bombs
this is false. you don't know what you are talking about. Tojo and his gov't were willing to fight on after the nukes. it was the emperor who called a halt.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 4:24pm
Posted by pyeatte at 01/05/2009 @ 1:55pm | ignore this person | warn this person
this correct save for the last sentence.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 4:26pm
Posted by john lowell at 01/05/2009 @ 3:24pm | ignore this person | warn this person
You raise an interesting point. Economic and political circumstances facing US today are unique and cumulative from decades of deregulation and global economic transformation compared to pre and post 1930 depression America. What was keeping us going during the transformation was easy money and credit. Just borrow what you can't make in real wages and salaries in order to perpetuate the lifestyle - facilitated by willing lenders aided by a willing government.
BO and his hoard of governmental and institutional economists are apparently going to try a huge stimulus package that represents less than one year US GDP. Is this the magic bullet that will restore confidence? Are all those jobs coming back? Short answer is.....no. If they do come back, they will likely come back overseas. The economic crisis has given cover for major corporations to cut back US employment - most of it for good I am afraid.
So what does the US enjoy as an absolute or comparative economic advantage in the global economy? We have some ideas kicking around like alternative energy technology....but I doubt this will ever come to pass. And - at this point, they are basically just ideas. We are in a real pickle to be sure. You may be right - we may have to start all over from the ground up.
Posted by OneVote at 01/05/2009 @ 4:31pm
emile,
And you say the improvement of reading in Texas schools is a lie. How so? How is what I have provided below a lie?
August 16, 2004, 8:36 a.m. Bush Mythology The Left has an unrealistic read on President Bush.
By Ronald Kessler
http://www.nationalreview.com/ comment/kessler200408160836.asp
excerpts originally from "A Matter of Character: Inside the White House of George W. Bush" by Ronald Kessler ....
Based on Lyons's advice, Bush developed a way to restore phonics to reading instruction in Texas. The results were dramatic. In 1995, 23 percent of third graders could not read. By 2003, that figure had improved to ten percent, according to state testing figures compiled by Kress, who became Bush's unpaid education adviser. After additional help for kids who failed, only two percent could not read. The greatest beneficiaries of restoring phonics to reading instruction -- which includes work on comprehension, spelling, and actual reading -- were minorities.
=====================
Here is another comment about that:
Ironically, the New York City public schools still use a form of whole language, yet I found the toniest private schools in New York all teach phonics.
"Of course we teach phonics," Beth Tashlik, the head of the Collegiate School's lower school, told me. "You can't teach reading without it."
Posted by sjchermak at 01/05/2009 @ 4:32pm
" Tojo and his gov't were willing to fight on after the nukes. it was the emperor who called a halt."
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 4:
Then we WERE justified in nuking them...and would be justified in more nukes...if they continued to fight on we would have had to invade Japan right down to the last house in order to end it...
or
take out as many support sites as possible with the least amount of American casualties of any kind...
ergo...
use the biggest, most destructive bullet in the gun...
nukes...
The last statement of Tojos resolve alone justifies massive force, overwhelming force against the society willing, as you say, to commit suicide...as...a..weapon..
sounds a little like....
ALLAH AKBAHR..
....to me.
Posted by YourJomamma at 01/05/2009 @ 4:34pm
Maybe we need to find the "Emperor" of the Islamo nuts...and get him to surrender to reason...
Posted by YourJomamma at 01/05/2009 @ 4:36pm
emile,
You say "what was the nuke in a country that was systematically firebombed. far more people perished in the bombing of Tokyo.
they would not have surrendered without the guarantee that the emperor would not be tried for war crimes and executed."
There was a lot of devestation in Japan prior to the nuclear bombs. But, in spite of that, it appeared Japan was not going to surrender.
The preponderance of intelligence shows they were going to continue to fight, by your own words you have shown many in Japan still wanted to anyway, even after the bombs.
Japan was building up in the areas they percieved (because they had intercepted some information of our plans, I believe) would be attacked during an invasion.
There was sentiment for peace and efforts for peace overtures, but the prepondance of the intelligence shows that these were not as serious as has been portrayed nor that they carried the weight that has been portrayed. In other words, these were not realistic, nor likely to have been followed through had there not been the nuclear bombs.
Posted by sjchermak at 01/05/2009 @ 4:42pm
Posted by sjchermak at 01/05/2009 @ 4:32pm | ignore this person | warn this person
they fudged the numbers. this was exposed long ago.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 4:50pm
no one knew that the nukes were different. no one knew about radiation poisoning for instance. all the japanese knew that it took only one plane what had been accomplished before by many planes. the country had been completely carpet bombed. the incendiaries were the most destructive as japan's houses were made of wood.
it was the guarantee of the emperor's safety that ended the war. the entry of the soviets too played a role, as they had territorial ambitions.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 4:55pm
you read one article and you know little. I read numerous books on the subject and what's more I can analyze the subject.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 4:57pm
I just want to point out that as of my posting right now, this thread has just won the election for President in the electoral college :D
Posted by Thrawn at 01/05/2009 @ 6:08pm
Posted by Thrawn at 01/05/2009 @ 6:08pm
Great thread! Best one in a LONG time!
Posted by Benchrest at 01/05/2009 @ 6:57pm
apropos Texas education miracle
In recent years, Texas has trumpeted the academic gains of Ms. Arevelo and millions more students largely on the basis of a state test, the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills, or TAAS. As a presidential candidate, Texas's former governor, George W. Bush, contended that Texas's methods of holding schools responsible for student performance had brought huge improvements in passing rates and remarkable strides in eliminating the gap between white and minority children.
The claims catapulted Houston's superintendent, Rod Paige, to Washington as education secretary and made Texas a model for the country. The education law signed by President Bush in January 2002, No Child Left Behind, gives public schools 12 years to match Houston's success and bring virtually all children to academic proficiency.
But an examination of the performance of students in Houston by The New York Times raises serious doubts about the magnitude of those gains. Scores on a national exam that Houston students took alongside the Texas exam from 1999 to 2002 showed much smaller gains and falling scores in high school reading.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 7:35pm
Posted by YourJomamma at 01/04/2009 @ 4:33pm
Did the United States of America have any of the things that you asked about Palestine in 1776?
To both you and Emile, the fact is that some nations are born of extraordinary circumstances and not by a long process of development. The Palestinians have been forged into a nation by what has happened to them and how they have responded to occupation and/or exile over the last 60-90 years.
Posted by cka2nd at 01/05/2009 @ 9:37pm
Posted by cka2nd at 01/05/2009 @ 9:37pm | ignore this person | warn this person
what nonsense. they were Jordanians until '67. they were ruled by Turks until '18. there was no Palestinian identity.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 10:16pm
Posted by ibbleblibble at 01/04/2009 @ 6:07pm
It is frankly preposterous to claim that Palestinians "enjoy their suffering." Did the American Indians enjoy their suffering at the hands of the U.S.? Did the people of the Philippines during the U.S. occupation? Did the Nicaraguans during the Contra War? Are the Tibetans under the rule of China?
Again, I am no fan of Hamas, but ample evidence exists that it was elected in response to their social service work and their frugality and honesty as compared to the rampant corruption of Fatah, not due to their supposed desire for a Holocaust 2.
Moreover, it really strikes me as smug to go on about the strategic or tactical failures of the oppressed without emphasizing the crimes of the oppressor, especially when we don't exactly have a How To manual for resisting occupation. Marxists like me have opposed terrorism as a strategy for liberation for over a hundred years, recognizing that it can only be justified in the heat of war or civil war. But while violent resistance ultimately failed to stop the occupation of American Indian lands by the U.S., throwing in the towel and bowing to one's attacker hasn't exactly served Nicaraguans well since voting in Washington's candidate 20 years ago. And just how is the Dalai Lama doing vis a vis the Chinese?
Please don't get me wrong. It would be condescending to withhold criticism from the Palestinians and merely cheer their leaders of the moment. Progress requires a free and honest debate (a fact representatives of both the ANC and the Sandanistas realized better than some of their supporters), but as with so much about this issue, one must strive for the proper balance, and by that standard, Israel is at fault far more than the Palestinians.
Posted by cka2nd at 01/05/2009 @ 10:19pm
And up until 1776, "Americans" were British, yet over the course of less than 10 years, a nation was forged. If you really think there is no sense of Palestinian identity now, you are not nearly as knowledgeable as you claim to be.
By the way, the hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who lived in Gaza, Israel and Lebanon, not to mention throughout the rest of the Middle East and the world (probably becoming the most proletarianized Arab population in the process) were not Jordanians until 1967. And while I would not claim a Palestinian identity existed under the Turks, are you saying that the mere fact of Turkish rule meant it was not possible to have a national consciousness? That would surprise the hell out of the Kurds and Armenians.
Posted by cka2nd at 01/05/2009 @ 10:29pm
I'm sorry. My 1/05/2009 @ 10:29pm post was in response to emile duBois' post of 01/05/2009 @ 10:16pm.
Posted by cka2nd at 01/05/2009 @ 10:31pm
you're all over the place on this. the jews of the holy land were known as palestinians during the mandate.
I was speaking of the west bank palestinians who were Jordanians, just like the Gazans were Egyptians.
the refugees have been in camps in the surrounding arab countries for more than a generation.
we were not speaking about Kurds or Armenians.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 10:37pm
Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict, Fourth Edition: A History with Documents (Paperback) by Charles D. Smith (Author)
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 10:48pm
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 10:37pm
Nevertheless, whether citizens of Jordan, Egypt or Israel, most of the Arabs of Palestine (Christian or Muslim, by the way) have come to see themselves as Palestinian, not as Jordanian, Egyptian or Israeli. And this consciousness certainly exists in the refugee camps, as well. One can wish it away or raise frankly academic objections, but a new national consciousness exists, just like a new one came into being on this continent 230 years ago.
Posted by cka2nd at 01/05/2009 @ 10:58pm
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 10:48pm
Sounds like a good book. May I recommend The Palestinians: From Peasants to Revolutionaries by Rosemary Sayigh? A second edition was released last year with an extensive new introduction by Noam Chomsky. The original was named Outstanding Academic Book of 1979 by Choice, a magazine for acquisitions librarians.
Posted by cka2nd at 01/05/2009 @ 11:18pm
there never was a country called Palestine.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 11:24pm
Maybe we need to find the "Emperor" of the Islamo nuts...and get him to surrender to reason...
Posted by YourJomamma at 01/05/2009 @ 4:36pm
Except the thing you people can't seem to puzzle out is that there is NO emperor of the islamo nuts. Contrary to what some here like to purport as "the truth" the vast majority of muslims aren't terrorists. Go figure. In fact the terrorists we are purportedly fighting seem to recognize no nation at all. We get reports of how we've killed the #3 man in all of AQ, at least that is, until next week when there's a new #3.
Weird, huh? Believe it or not this information has been widely available for years.
Posted by TexasFlood at 01/06/2009 @ 01:49am
I suggest that George Bush and Dick Cheney are the real terrorist http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1EXKLVgEx0
Posted by KyHillbilly at 01/06/2009 @ 06:58am
So many misconceptions about this conflict. First off, bad as Hamas is (religious fanatics not my thing as an atheist) and although they loath Israel for it has done to the Palestinians, they have stated that they would accept a state within the 1967 borders: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1035414.html. Israel, on the other hand, has ignored the Arab League's proposals that call for its acceptance in the region IF it goes back to said borders. Even Olmert admitted that the problem has been the Occupation and the solution is a return to the '67 borders: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1036118.html. Olmert knows he's out so he can do and say whatever he wants, but the rest of the Israeli leadership acting like he said nothing. Obviously, Israel has an undercurrent of leaders who are afraid to do the right thing for fear of public backlash (most Israelis don't want to give up an inch of Arab E. Jerusalem), just as politicians here are mostly spineless (Kucinich, Ron Paul & a few others are exceptions) and will only back the imperialist Israeli position. The rockets were a response to a blockade & Israel's refusal to accept an election. Granted, Hamas seized power through a putsch as well, but just about all of these problems could (and still can) be discussed and resolved. An over-arching peace based on the '67 borders can end this. Now it remains to be seen if Obama has the guts to go the extra mile as his fellow Dems go looking for cover as they blame the Palestinians yet again so as to not anger the pro-Israel lobby which stands ever ready to lob their charges of anti-Semiticism at anyone who isn't 100% behind Israel, including I might add, American Jews.
Posted by nukemind at 01/06/2009 @ 12:52pm
So many misconceptions about this conflict. First off, bad as Hamas is (religious fanatics not my thing as an atheist)
misconception #1. this is not a religious conflict, it is a territorial one. Hamas are not religious fanatics. they are for instance at war with Fatah, whose religion they share.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/06/2009 @ 1:06pm
misconception #1. this is not a religious conflict, it is a territorial one. Hamas are not religious fanatics. they are for instance at war with Fatah, whose religion they share.
Posted by emile duBois
Hmm, perhaps I didn't make this clear, but you are stating the obvious. We all know they are all Muslims. Hamas POLITICALLY supports instituting Sharia law, Fatah does not.
It is indeed a conflict over territory occupied by Israel.
Posted by nukemind at 01/06/2009 @ 1:30pm
you suggested that they are religious fanatics. I corrected you.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/06/2009 @ 1:35pm
you suggested that they are religious fanatics. I corrected you.
Posted by emile duBois
Uh, are you trying to tell me that Hamas aren't religious fanatics? Okay, they are religious fundamentalists. I'm having trouble as to where I am being corrected here or the point as I DID NOT state that this was a religious conflict, but a political one as all my points were political.
Posted by nukemind at 01/06/2009 @ 1:39pm
Uh, are you trying to tell me that Hamas aren't religious fanatics?
yes.
Okay, they are religious fundamentalists.
and that is not the same thing.
to turn this into a religious war, as many try to do here and elsewhere, does a great disservice to the world's muslims. and that is not a trivial issue.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/06/2009 @ 2:10pm
Uh, are you trying to tell me that Hamas aren't religious fanatics?
yes.
Okay, they are religious fundamentalists.
and that is not the same thing.
to turn this into a religious war, as many try to do here and elsewhere, does a great disservice to the world's muslims. and that is not a trivial issue.
Posted by emile duBois
My points were not religious as I don't believe this is a religious conflict, but, as in most similar cases, has at its root, territory.
Hamas' desire to institute sharia law in this day and age to me IS fanatical. In this particular case, fundamentalist (which can vary in its usage) and fanatic almost bleed into one definition of this group. Fatah, by comparison, is (by American standards) a leftist group. And nearly all of the players in the region use religion. Israel calls itself a Jewish state for example, Hamas wants an Islamic Republic (despite a large Christian minority amongst the Palestinians). With that said, I believe their struggle against Israeli imperialism is understandable.
Lastly, I seek to do neither serve or mete out any disservice to Muslims, Jews or Christians as I'm not a fan of any of these Abrahamic faiths, which at their core share many commonalities. The main actors use religion as rallying points as part of their nationalist identities, but the conflict IS about land and one side's imperialist ambitions that have kept this conflict going. Main points remain this: Hamas is willing to accept a peace based on the '67 borders, while Israel has yet to do likewise. Since this is the fair solution to this conflict, choosing 'a side' isn't that tough and, for me, is not about religion.
Posted by nukemind at 01/06/2009 @ 2:27pm
Since this is the fair solution to this conflict, choosing 'a side' isn't that tough and, for me, is not about religion. Posted by nukemind at 01/06/2009 @ 2:27pm | ignore this person | warn this person
you are oversimplifying the issues. and what you personally think of other people's religions is irrelevant.
fundamentalist does not equal fanatic. the Amish for example could be described as fundamentalist.
I realize it was not your point, but with Bush and others trying to turn the political conflicts we have with SOME muslims into a crusade, don't get me started on the real crusades, a correction seemed in order.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/06/2009 @ 4:47pm
Great thread! Best one in a LONG time! Posted by Benchrest at 01/05/2009 @ 6:57pm
I agree. There are more posts here than for any other subject posted at the Nation. Not too much flaming and a lot of information. Emile seems to know his stuff.
The Jewish-Palestinian issue is one that I can't even weigh in on... I don't know enough. But with the info posted here I have a starting place for study. I do know that the whole thing pisses me off. I know that's just a visceral reaction, but I can't seem to side with anyone either. I Do agree with the thought that it shouldn't be painted as a religious war. It seems to be about territory, bringing a faint hint of the overpopulation theme into sight.
On the religion theme, I once found a website that was developed by a fringe group of the Jewish faith. I wish I could find it again, but this Rabbi stated that the Jews, as he saw it, had NOT found the promised land yet. Anyone know who this might be? I'm sure he's not a popular figure over there.
Posted by ficheye at 01/06/2009 @ 8:04pm
Posted by ficheye at 01/06/2009 @ 8:04pm | ignore this person | warn this person
thank you.
there are some orthodox jews who want to have nothing to do with any gov't, including that of Israel. they'll still take the subsidy, of course.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/06/2009 @ 8:22pm
pyeatte and others - regarding the atomic bombs, you have missed my point, which turned on the importance (and extreme difficulty) of considering humanity in the fog and rage of warmaking. Only in the 20th Century were civilians targeted so ruthlessly and en masse. This culminated in the atomic bombs, and in Tokyo and Dresden. So what if we only had two bombs? Japan wasn't attacking anyone, and we had total air superiority. We could have disengaged into a "phony war" while we built more a-bombs. A demonstration detonation was a clear alternative. However, I admit all this is "presentism," judging the past from a contemporary perspective. Americans were furious at Japan and its sick culture. Only later did MacArthur discover the default "innocence" of average people there and call them "a nation of 12 year-olds."
The whole frantic mood of the discourse in these comments is rooted in the Israeli fear of Palestinians and Palistinian hatred for the atrocities of Israel, both emotions justified. But obliterating what you call Hamas is impossible to the extent that Hamas represents Palestinian rage. Such attempts only feed the rage - witness today's killings at the UN schools. How can you talk this way? Have you no spiritual or moral center? The two antagonists fall deeper into hell with their arms entwined.
"Make peace with thine enemy while thou are in the way with him." Where did I read THAT?
But only U.S pressure on the stronger party - Israel - can bring them to their senses. That requires Obama (remember, he makes his moves slowly) to defy the Zionist lobby. A nice financial kick in the ass might work.
I think the fate of the Middle East turns on what's in the heart of Barack Obama.
litenotheat the Jew
Posted by litenotheat at 01/06/2009 @ 8:42pm
The never-ending hatred of Jews never ceases to disappoint me. I was going to say "amaze me", but after the holocaust why would anything else that people say or do regarding Jewish people amaze anyone? The Palestinians actively seek to destroy Israel. It is their stated goal. And they are too cowardly to do it any other way than striking at civilian targets. And they are so cowardly that they launch their missiles from civilian areas, thus ensuring that the anti-zionists around the world can accuse Israel of targeting civilians. Can you imagine what would happen if Cuba were to occasionally lob missiles into "remote areas" of the U.S.? Does anyone remember that the Palestinians were dancing in the streets on 9-11? Israel has the right to defend itself against all attacks. Period.
Posted by mrpoizun at 01/06/2009 @ 9:08pm
Posted by litenotheat at 01/06/2009 @ 8:42pm | ignore this person | warn this person
do not forget the racism of the pacific war. they would never have dropped a nuke on white people, though they were willing to incinerate civilians by the hundred thousand.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/06/2009 @ 9:27pm
"there never was a country called Palestine."
Posted by emile duBois at 01/05/2009 @ 11:24pm
----------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration_of_1917
The Balfour Declaration of 1917 (dated 2 November 1917) was a classified formal statement of policy by the British government stating that the British government "view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people" with the understanding that "nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."
------------
Where oh where is Palestine? Where are we going to put " a national home for the Jewish people" now?
Bummer.
BTW. Nice of those British chaps to give away someone else's land to a bunch of western zionists.
Okay. Let's call it "bikini bottom". Any chance those bottomers can have their homes back?
Eric
PS. You religious folks will be the end of the rest of us.
Posted by Malcontent at 01/06/2009 @ 10:36pm
mal, palestine was a region, not a country. elementary.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/06/2009 @ 11:27pm
Okay. Let's call it "bikini bottom". Any chance those bottomers can have their homes back?
no, they can't. I cannot get my grandparents house in Pomerania back, because that is now Poland.
this has happened all over the world.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/07/2009 @ 12:10am
Israel, the criminal state, the Nazi entity of modern time has murdered 135 Palestinians and wounded 400 today alone. This brings the total Palestinians killed to 660 and over 3000 wounded; mostly civilians. Today's massacre included shelling a school at the United Nation's compound in Gaza where 43 children were killed. Body parts of Palestinian children were scattered all around the school. John King, the director of the UN food distribution in Gaza stated that he had supplied the Israeli army with the school locations and told them about the presence of children in that building.
This glaring war crime committed by the Jewish State received unanimous condemnation by the entire world, with two exceptions: The Nazi leaders of Israel and the USA war criminal President George Bush. Giving Israel 6 billions of our tax annually makes all of us partners in this war crime.
Posted by CripThink at 01/07/2009 @ 12:34am
And to think I almost missed the inspirational postings of comanchenation and CHERMAK.
Just when you think that it's past lights out at the institution...
Posted by ficheye at 01/07/2009 @ 01:27am
I appreciate The Nation keeping this string going.
Increasingly, it's obvious to me that a little common sense sheds light on the developing situation in Gaza. The New York Times is downplaying the atrocity at the U.N. school today, as is the Washington Post. Had it been an Isreali-filled school, what would the coverage have looked like? Again, think for a moment about the event. The Israeli military had been informed that civilians were there in significant numbers. They were given the GPS co-ordinates by the UN and asked not to attack. It then appeared they received mortar fire from that locale. If you had any respect for human life, wouldn't you, as a commander, drop in a platoon to take out the mortar position or, if they had left the locale, to secure the spot? Or would you say "what the f___, take em all out," as the Israelis obviously did.?
"'When you're fired at, you have to fight back," said Gen. Ilan Tal, a military spokesman." That's their ruthless, base mentality, and it clearly assumes Arab lives are essentially worthless. Again, I hope our new president measures up to the hopes many of us have for him. He WILL have to be the One to stop this bestiality, which is primarily Israeli, but is simply, on a deeper level, male.
Posted by litenotheat at 01/07/2009 @ 06:44am
mal, palestine was a region, not a country. elementary.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/06/2009 @ 11:27pm
I am sure that semantic distinction is lost on those whom consider themselves Palestinians.
If I somehow 'proved' (not saying I can. BTW) that America and Germany were not 'real' countries (like those savage injuns), would YOU feel any less German or American?
I'm not even sure I'm proud to be one anymore, but I'm still an American. (Unless I travel, then I'm Canadian).
Eric
Posted by Malcontent at 01/07/2009 @ 07:35am
Just when you think that it's past lights out at the institution...
Posted by ficheye at 01/07/2009 @ 01:27am
We hard wired the lights.
No, I don't know where nurse ratchet is or what that funny smell is.
Posted by Malcontent at 01/07/2009 @ 07:38am
Mal, Germany, unlike england for instance was not a country until the 19th century.
the palestinian identity is a very recent phenomena.
the difference between a region and a country is undeniably huge.
Iraq for example was known as the Iraq, a region, not a country. we speak of the midwest, and we don't call it a state.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/07/2009 @ 09:56am
"Emile seems to know his stuff."
Posted by ficheye at 01/06/2009 @ 8:04pm
just wait until he and brunowe get into one of their little sparring matches.
I have to get out my dictionary and read slowly, and even then I can never tell who won.
Posted by Benchrest at 01/07/2009 @ 10:55am
Posted by Benchrest at 01/07/2009 @ 10:55am | ignore this person | warn this person
cute. I appreciate brunowe's comments, and yours too.
I am an autodidact, self taught. this sometimes leads to a large hole in knowledge. I am always pleased to be corrected, because I have learned something.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/07/2009 @ 11:02am
"Kaminer analyzes periods of mutual violence and relative calm in the past few years and finds that in 80% of the cases, it is Israel that has re-initiated the violence."
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/07/2009 @ 11:05am
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/07/2009 @ 11:05am | ignore this person | warn this person
you believe this?
Posted by emile duBois at 01/07/2009 @ 1:38pm
Posted by Benchrest at 01/07/2009 @ 10:55am | ignore this person | warn this person
this is really a very nice compliment, and I'm sure brunowe would join me in thanking you for this.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/07/2009 @ 8:03pm
emile,
Back to the subject of Hiroshima.
Up above you said "you read one article and you know little. I read numerous books on the subject and what's more I can analyze the subject."
Then if you can, why haven't you?
You still have not refuted the fact that at the end of the war the preponderance of intelligence the U.S. was getting indicated that the Japanese were not preparing for a surrender, but a fight to the end.
You just keep restating your opinions.
But instead of leaving well enough alone, you keep going until you step into it.
You said, later "Above you said "do not forget the racism of the pacific war. they would never have dropped a nuke on white people, though they were willing to incinerate civilians by the hundred thousand."
Whoops! At that point your arguments come flying apart, because you have let out that some of what is behind your arguments is just the same old same old - the typical leftist tendencies towards America-blame and race-card throwing. Why, the whole thing was just typical American racism!
When I refer to that as typical leftist it is because that is how much of the left behaves. I know one is not supposed to "label" people as left or right or liberal or conservative, blah, blah, blah... but that is the best way to describe it.
So your arguments about Hiroshima lose all credibility, and appear to be the typical leftist conspiracy theory with evil America, as always, as the blame.
But to believe your lines of thought requires one to consider Harry Truman as evil personified, willing to consign innocent Japanese to death unnecessarily because he was a racist, or that he was trying to intimidate the Soviets.
That is stretching things beyond credibility.
You should have left well enough alone, you blew it with your last post.
Posted by sjchermak at 01/07/2009 @ 8:27pm
by no means. that there was a distinct racial component to the pacific war has been stated many times.
execution of prisoners for example was rare in the war against germany, not so rare in the pacific. granted the japanese were more than brutal, but we aren't talking about them.
the internment of japanese americans was a racist act. no such action was taken against germans or italians.
that the bombs were a signal to the soviets too has been stated many times, I did not invent it.
look at how negro troops were treated during the war and most of all after, and deny racism. you cannot.
near the end of the pacific war Japan's military was stretched over a huge arc in the pacific and china etc.
the issue of the emperor was crucial. McArthur realized this and he fostered the myth that the emperor was not a war criminal, such as Tojo, on which all of the blame fell.
the japanese would have committed mass suicides and suicide missions for their emperor.
the country was so devastated by the firebombing, there was hardly anything left standing in the big cities. americans who entered japan were astonished at the destruction. many were of the opinion that the nuclear bombs hastened the war's end by a matter of days only.
I refer you to a discussion of these issues in: John W Dower, "Embracing Defeat, Japan in the wake of world war two"
also Liddle Hart's History of WW2.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/07/2009 @ 8:41pm
when you say typical lefty... you betray your absurd ignorance. this has nothing to do with left or right. you are just grinding your axe.
the pacific war was a neo colonialist affair with america fighting for the colonialist booty of the fading empires of Britain, France and Holland.
the "sneak" attack at pearl harbor was accidental in that Japan had intended a break of relations to precede the attack. due to human error the order of events was reversed.
Japan was no threat to the US proper, they had absolutely no chance of invading the US.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/07/2009 @ 8:49pm
I'm not being sarcastic.
I never, from my schooldays, understood the "necessity" of what we did in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Weren't the Japanese home islands and the mainland, basically, in naval surround by that time? By then, just what were they threatening from the Japanese mainland? Couldn't we have blockaded them and simply contained the menace? Where could they go?
I never got this concept of (sic)"....well, then we would have had to invade, and millions of GI's would have been killed, etc. " Why would we have had to invade? Let them sit on the damn island. I don't get it. Still don't.
Posted by schnellerheinz at 01/07/2009 @ 11:03pm
emile,
You talk about axe grinding, it seems you and maybe schnellerheinz are grinding the axe.
And the axe is the template of American wrong, that is ground quite a bit on this website.
You had World War II, with the Nazis in Europe and Japan in the Pacific, trying to establish domination while committing unspeakable atrocities, in addition to the Nazi goal of exterminating an entire race of people.
Yet now, through your comments above, one sees that acutally the history of World War II boils down, at least in the Pacific, as always, to a recititation of American wrong, racism, etc etc.
America was fighting Japan, I guess, to advance American imperialism. Schnellerheinz says that once Japan was surrounded we were supposed to just stop and let them sit there.
You have this massive war with massive death and Japanese atrocities, but we of course are to blame, no doubt for it happening to begin with and for not just stopping instead of ending it.
I don't know how to argue aginst this mindset. You declare me igorant but please tell me how many groups of people other than the far political left think in these terms.
Everything always seems to boil down to American, Israeli, or Republican wrong.
On one of the other threads now George W. Bush is declared wrong for making appointments.
Until January 20, he is President. Yet, for the first time in American history, a President is wrong for being President, and carrying out Presidential tasks.
You are supposed to stop being President if The Nation staff says so, regardless of what the Constitution says.
I don't know if this (a President doing Presidential tasks when The Nation says no) is an impeachable task.
I guess after you try Harry Truman for war crimes you can address this.
Posted by sjchermak at 01/08/2009 @ 10:08am
ted by sjchermak at 01/08/2009 @ 10:08am | ignore this person | warn this person
you are an ass, and you distort what I am saying. go argue with yourself.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/08/2009 @ 11:22am
sjchermak
you, like many here, think that american shit don't stink, and that any criticism of america and its actions automatically means excusing the crimes of others. a fallacy.
you believe the fact that both germany and Japan behaved brutally excuses american brutality. it does not.
it is a fact that Japan's expansionism was at the expense of the colonial masters France, Britain and Holland. america did not stir until the Japanese had gotten to Vietnam.
I am not saying that they should not have done so.
Hitler too, was no threat to america. he was a threat to Russia and england. again, I am glad that he was stopped.
I am opposed to the saturation bombing of civilian populations, including Gaza by the way. Dresden and Tokyo were war crimes, something some of the participants acknowledged at the time.
war crime trials are always victor's justice.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/08/2009 @ 12:00pm
emile,
I am not an ass. PhillipMcCrevice has rated me as an assclown, but I am not an ass.
I am not talking about "any" criticism of America.
I am talking about this ridiculous revision that the circumstances of World War II was American imperialism, and unnecessary in some cases, and war crimes, and racism, etc.
At some point those (including you) with this minset overdo it.
You say I distort what you say but I don't agree.
In cased you didn't realize, when war happens it is bad and some nasty stuff occurs during war.
This is not good in any way, but sometimes when a country or allied countries are in these situations it is better to end it quickly rather than prolong it. And sometimes the ending it quickly part is brutal beyond belief, but perhaps less brutal in the long run than letting things drag out.
You cite Dresden as a war crime. So we weren't supposed to firebomb Dresden.
But when Germany was defeated, they were thoughoughly defeated and crushed. Afterwards, a modern free democratic (in the western sector) Germany emerged. There was no lingering insurgency.
But, and this is back to talking about the leftist perspective again, many who would blog or write on this site do not comprehend this.
We were into a war we didn't start in World War II, against brutal opressive enemies. If we stopped short in Japan, or did not throughly crush Japan and Germany, what would the circumstances have been?
Would we have problems to this day, would we have had lingering prolonged war and loss of life?
Quite likely, yes, in fact almost certainly yes.
But monday morning quarterback leftists seem always to cite the "wrongs" America or allies did, and believe niavely that things would have turned out better if not for the wrongs.
Posted by sjchermak at 01/08/2009 @ 1:00pm
You cite Dresden as a war crime. So we weren't supposed to firebomb Dresden. But when Germany was defeated, they were thoughoughly defeated and crushed. Afterwards, a modern free democratic (in the western sector) Germany emerged. There was no lingering insurgency.
the saturation bombing of germany did not achieve the strategic objective. german industrial production actually increased during that time.
the war was brought to an end by the defeat of the armed forces of germany, not by the wholesale slaughter of the civilian population. same with Japan.
you love that word crushed don't you. you are another member of the grrr, kill, kill club.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/08/2009 @ 1:14pm
In cased you didn't realize, when war happens it is bad and some nasty stuff occurs during war.
but america can never be guilty, right?
it was my parents who endured the civilian bombardment, night and day, in Berlin during the war. my mom worked in Goering's office, typing on an Enigma machine. my dad, an Austrian was drafted. neither was a nazi, they were ordinary people. they did not start the war either.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/08/2009 @ 1:21pm
to study and analyze the past is not monday morning quarterbacking, it is history.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/08/2009 @ 1:25pm
the underlying view to your post is that end justifies the means. it all turned out so well for germany and japan, so why bother looking.
this also the prevailing view on Iraq. the civil war there has slowed, so all's well that ends well, nicht wahr?
it has not ended well in Iraq, it has not even ended.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/08/2009 @ 1:44pm
emile,
First, those with your mindset always start out by framing the argument that somebody like me is saying America is never, ever wrong.
Thus we are zealots who would take away your free speech if we could.
(No, you have not stated these things specifically but in your line of thinking this stuff is implied)
Then it switches to after the fact angst about past "crimes" by America.
You have me in a no-win situation here, because you have a close personal family connection with people who were not responsible for the war but severely impacted by it.
Everybody knows not all Germans were responsible for the creation of the Nazis or what they did.
But in a massive war some of the political left here hyperexamines what went on in the past - I guess to try to "learn" for the future.
But first, this reexamination of history may not be accurate on your part. You have the assumption that the massive civilian casualties had no impact. But maybe not- if the population had not been devestated and demoralized, then the decisive victory (along with the complete end of the war) may not have happened.
How does this apply today? Case in point - Iraq.... we obviously now know that when we invaded in 2003 we did not have the foces necessary to maintain an adequate peace afterwards. And we tried to win the war with as little civilian impact as possible.
It was probably felt that turning things over to the Iraqis as quick as possible would minimize a negative view of the U.S. in that area of the world.
We were no doubt concerned about being viewed as dictators or conquerors, rather than liberators.
But not doing that opened the door for much more chaos than expected after the war.
I think you are preaching the wrong lessons from history.
Posted by sjchermak at 01/08/2009 @ 2:43pm
Thus we are zealots who would take away your free speech if we could. (No, you have not stated these things specifically but in your line of thinking this stuff is implied)
no, it isn't. I'm quite forceful in my views, and I state them clearly. so cut that shit out.
the bombed civilians did not hasten the end of the war. they did the opposite. this is acknowledged by military historians.
wars are ended by the defeat of the opponent's army. incidentally, the war in europe was ended to a great extent by the soviets. it is they that faced the brunt of Hitler's army.
the allies dithered, and took years to invade france, and that is why at war's end the russians were in germany, instead of at the russo polish border. and the cold war might have been avoided.
much of this is my opinion but not mine alone. I have indicated my sources. Liddle-Hart, the inventor of the Blitzkrieg, incidentally, and others.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/08/2009 @ 2:50pm
whatever
Posted by sjchermak at 01/08/2009 @ 3:55pm
emile,
This whole thing got started because of the topic of Hiroshima. I guess that got started to begin with because somebody way, way up above cited it as a wrong.
I have told you I do not agree. For all the people that re-construct it was not necessary, I add some more comment.
Yes, Japan had already suffered great devestation, but they had not given up, had they?
It seems they still held out hope they could prevail.
Yes, the amount of devestation of the two atomic bombs was no worse than the total of the devestation already applied to Japan.
But it was how it happened. The bombs on Tokyo were extended bombing over a period of time.
The atom bombs wiped out 2 whole cities immediately.
I do not believe the Japanese knew how many of these things we had. I think as best as I can recall, their existence only became public right at the end when they were used. They were a suprise to most people, including the Japanese.
After all, FDR did not tell Truman about the bombs being developed.
So, with no knowledge as far as I knew by the Japanese of the quantity of bombs we had, they now faced the real possibility that we could drop hundreds of these things and Japan would be completely incinerated, with virtually no Japan left, thus no hope of even survival let alone winning the war.
Prior to that, even though there was massive devestation, they obviously held out hope not only of surviving but of winning the war.
Now, I suppose you will tell me why I am wrong about this, too.
Posted by sjchermak at 01/08/2009 @ 4:03pm
they obviously held out hope not only of surviving but of winning the war.
you know how the Japanese felt? clairvoyant I suppose.
Posted by emile duBois at 01/08/2009 @ 8:21pm
Couldn't we have blockaded them and simply contained the menace? Where could they go? I never got this concept of (sic)"....well, then we would have had to invade, and millions of GI's would have been killed, etc. " Why would we have had to invade? Let them sit on the damn island. I don't get it. Still don't. Posted by schnellerheinz at 01/07/2009 @ 11:03pm
Blockades and containment cost big bucks, especially when you're paying for a huge Navy. The US was going broke, and needed to end the war. you don't end a war by letting the other side "sit on the damn island". You end it with utter defeat of the other side, or you don't end it (Vietnam and Korea ring a bell?). I take great issue with people who say, 50 years after the fact, "we should not have dropped the bomb". It displays a woeful ignorance of history.
Posted by twillie at 01/08/2009 @ 8:23pm