war in Gaza

[Anonymous]

^^that was supposed to be "where", not "whether"...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

First of all, you're assuming that the foreign power would never miss! I said that my house could be bombed by accident. According to your logic, that would be okay because the Navy Yard is located in a residential area. It would be okay to bomb by accident the houses of people who live next to the Marine Barracks because the Marines were so cowardly as to put their barracks in a regular neighborhood.

And if I live next door to a Senator? Or to the Secretary of State? Israel is going after political leaders. I suppose it's okay to bomb my rowhouse (by accident of course) that happens to be attached to Senator So 'n So's house? Are they hiding among civilians? Back when I lived in a nicer neighborhood, I lived near Madeline Albright and dc went to school a block from John Kerry's house. According to your logic, dc's school would be expendable because John Kerry was using the school as human shields.

I'm sorry. I thought we were talking about war, not a slumber party. I think an attack anywhere on the US would probably not be "okay", regardless of whether civilians were targetted or if our unnamed enemy just didn't execute their attack with the care and precision that we could expect from more thoughtful attackers. Until micro-assassin-robot-bugs are developed (and humanely tested), there is going to be collateral damage in war. So collateral damage at your dc's school would be just as okay as damaged sustained at the original target; that is, NOT OKAY. But it's war. They're doing the best they can to accomplish their goals with a minimum of civilian casualties, seeing as how they are under the same kind of international scrutiny that the US was in Iraq. It sucks that innocents have been killed but how long would you accept rockets being fired at YOUR civilians before you broke out the heavy equipment? It might take you a while, though.

I would have eased the economic blockade. I would have withdrawn the settlements from the West Bank. I would have arranged a just division of scarce water resources in the area. There is a long list of things that I would have done first before attacking Gaza. Ultimately Israel will be more hurt by this attack than helped. This was a foolish decision and all driven by an election campaign.

At least you agree that collateral damage is not okay. That's some progress. Or is it just not okay if it affects Anglo-Americans?

There's still namedropping to be done.

Oh wow, I'm devastated by the logic of your argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's WAR. I mean, even the Terminator had to bump off a few people and he knew exactly where his target was. That's a FACT.

Ha ha! You're not seriously calling the Terminator a FACT?!!
This is rich!
Besides the Terminator started on on the side of evil! Best to find another analogy.
Oh my.

Um..are you trying to say that the machines are the "evil side"? I'm pretty sure there are some Machines viewing this thread who are not going to agree or like your bigotry.

LOL! Sorry, machines. Just kidding!

[Anonymous]

Read the first lines of that article again, "While much attention has been focused on alleged Israeli human rights violations in the volatile West Bank and Gaza, the popular press has chosen to virtually ignore violations of fundamental human rights that take place daily in almost every Arab country"

This article was written to state that Israel is a more civilized country with a democracy than the fundamentally uncivilized Arab countries and therefore, everybody should shut up about these "alleged" human rights violations.


Since that is a purely subjective conclusion, that is whether another PPs comment on the utter bias of the author comes in to play.

And please tell me that you're not going to argue that the human rights violations that Israelis are accused of are not happening or do not matter.

I was pointing out that the point of the article was to deflect attention away from the human rights violations committed by Israel by drawing attention to what the writer of that article believes to be the fundamental failings of all Arab governments. Instead of addressing any of the issues of what Israel is doing, the writer simply says that Arabs are bad to their people. Why defend anybody for posting this article. It is a clearly racist rant.

[Anonymous]

As a very dark brown Israeli, I would like to discourage people from calling those who support Israel racist. Many many Israeli Jews come from Arab countries like Yemen, Iraq, and Morocco.

In the US people tend to forget this. 39% of Israeli Jews are brown, and 37% are white. We were expelled from these Arab countries and forced to relocate to Israel, where we live side by side with white Jews.

[Anonymous]

I'm still waiting for you to prove me wrong about the human rights issues in Arab countries.

[Anonymous]

PP here-- I often suspect this information is not more widely available here in the states because it really undermines the "Israel is a racist state" argument.

[Anonymous]

And if I can't prove you wrong, that means that it's OK for Israel to kill as many Arabs as they "need" to to ensure the "security" of their more "civilized" state?

[Anonymous]

As a very dark brown Israeli, I would like to discourage people from calling those who support Israel racist. Many many Israeli Jews come from Arab countries like Yemen, Iraq, and Morocco.

Clearly the racism is not about skin color, but about ethnicity in this context.

[Anonymous]

I'm still waiting for you to prove me wrong about the human rights issues in Arab countries.

We're still waiting for you to explain why even if every word you wrote is completely, 100% accurate, it negates that fact that Palestinians in Gaza are currently the victims of human rights abuses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And if I can't prove you wrong, that means that it's OK for Israel to kill as many Arabs as they "need" to to ensure the "security" of their more "civilized" state?

Okay, let me break it down for you since you are clearly confused.

1) Poster said Arabs way of life was backwards and messed up.
2) Poster was called a bigot by another poster.
3) Poster provided proof that the Arab way of life was mostly backwards. Poster provided information from a pro-Israel site.
4) You said the author of that site was biased and way off. Posted that he worked for the bush admin. therefore having no validiaty?
5) Poster said that it didn't matter where that information came from, that the basis of the article was pretty much true. NOT THAT IT WAS OKAY TO KILL INNOCENTS!!!!
6) Poster is still waiting for facts that prove that article wrong.


1, 2, 3...Go...

[Anonymous]

How does the violation of human rights in Arab states undermine the allegations of racism against Israel?

Additionally over the years Israeli society has been dominated by light-skinned Jews of European origin. I don't think Jews from Ethiopia get equal treatment there and certainly there was much discrimination over the years against Jews of Middle Eastern origin. Israel, like every country, has a dominant group which wants to stay in power and that group has been the Ashkenazi Jews from Europe.

But again I don't get how the fact that there are serious human rights violations in other Middle Eastern countries undermines the fact that there is racism in Israel?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

First of all, you're assuming that the foreign power would never miss! I said that my house could be bombed by accident. According to your logic, that would be okay because the Navy Yard is located in a residential area. It would be okay to bomb by accident the houses of people who live next to the Marine Barracks because the Marines were so cowardly as to put their barracks in a regular neighborhood.

And if I live next door to a Senator? Or to the Secretary of State? Israel is going after political leaders. I suppose it's okay to bomb my rowhouse (by accident of course) that happens to be attached to Senator So 'n So's house? Are they hiding among civilians? Back when I lived in a nicer neighborhood, I lived near Madeline Albright and dc went to school a block from John Kerry's house. According to your logic, dc's school would be expendable because John Kerry was using the school as human shields.

I'm sorry. I thought we were talking about war, not a slumber party. I think an attack anywhere on the US would probably not be "okay", regardless of whether civilians were targetted or if our unnamed enemy just didn't execute their attack with the care and precision that we could expect from more thoughtful attackers. Until micro-assassin-robot-bugs are developed (and humanely tested), there is going to be collateral damage in war. So collateral damage at your dc's school would be just as okay as damaged sustained at the original target; that is, NOT OKAY. But it's war. They're doing the best they can to accomplish their goals with a minimum of civilian casualties, seeing as how they are under the same kind of international scrutiny that the US was in Iraq. It sucks that innocents have been killed but how long would you accept rockets being fired at YOUR civilians before you broke out the heavy equipment? It might take you a while, though.

I would have eased the economic blockade. I would have withdrawn the settlements from the West Bank. I would have arranged a just division of scarce water resources in the area. There is a long list of things that I would have done first before attacking Gaza. Ultimately Israel will be more hurt by this attack than helped. This was a foolish decision and all driven by an election campaign.

At least you agree that collateral damage is not okay. That's some progress. Or is it just not okay if it affects Anglo-Americans?

There's still namedropping to be done.

Oh wow, I'm devastated by the logic of your argument.

So, you would have basically rewarded the firing of rockets by allowing freer trade and withdrawn the settlements. "Here, Hamas....send rockets over and we'll give you what you want. Can we bring you hot towels as well?" SMART.

Oh, there was no argument about you namedropping nor was there any internal logic that needed to be comprehended. You did it. It happened.

Drop names, not bombs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
So, you would have basically rewarded the firing of rockets by allowing freer trade and withdrawn the settlements. "Here, Hamas....send rockets over and we'll give you what you want. Can we bring you hot towels as well?" SMART.

Yep, well it's smarter than fighting a war which has NOT stopped rocket attacks and which is making Israel look like a pitiless aggressor when it wants to look like it's defending its own people.

Lebanon. All. Over. Again.

And by the way, thanks again, Israel for giving Hamas all this political credibility. A lot of us would like to see Hamas lose power but you've just ensured that Hamas will be the darling of the Arab street for years to come. Thanks for that.

Oh, there was no argument about you namedropping nor was there any internal logic that needed to be comprehended. You did it. It happened.

That was my point. There was no argument. You were trying to win by using a stupid insult. Like I said, I'm devastated.

[Anonymous]

Better a darling in the Arab street than a rocket in my living room.