What a monstrous piece. |
The failure in his premise is the residents of Gaza are not civilized is false. The problem is the Hamas militias store and launch the munitions ammo amounts the population. |
Do not equate the IDF to the US Armed Forces. |
You are right. IDF is much better trained. |
Many Israeli soldiers seem quite young, but often exceedingly brutal. Their treatment of Palestinians is highly repressive. It's not a bunch of friendly Yanks handing out candy to the local kids. |
Shall we start posting the inflammatory Arab and Palestinian articles out there on killing Jews and Israelis? It's pretty easy to get. They are everywhere. The TOI piece is bad, and was appropriately taken down soon after it went up. If you saw in the comments, it was Jews and Israelis that were inflamed by this piece and demanded that TOI take it down.
|
It's actually a great piece that asks an important question. Let's look at Clinton. He refused to take out Bin Laden because it would cause civilian casualties in another country. What Clinton forgot is his job is to protect the citizens of THIS country. Judging by September 11th, he did not. We lost 2,000 of our own that day.
He has proven Netanyahu correct. |
But were they inflamed by the suggestion that wiping out Gaza was an appropriate response to Hamas, or by the characterization of such a course of an action as a permissible "genocide"? It would seem the latter reflects the desire to preserve the position that Israel could never engage in genocide, while still accepting the inflicting of massive casualties primarily on civilians in Gaza. To many others, however, the actions of Israel right now speak for themselves. |
If Israel could attack just the militants, they would. But, the militants do not wear uniforms. They blend in with the surrounding people, even taking refuge along side the innocent. The situation is certainly unjust. But by both sides. |
Just as an FYI, that article on genocide was on the blog page which is unmoderated. Any crazy person can post anything, and clearly did. It was not sanctioned by the paper or any editor.
I support Israel but found the article abhorrent. |
And here's the response from TOI that was just published on the unacceptable post.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/times-of-israel-removes-an-unacceptable-blog-post/ |
I'm the earlier pp who criticized Jeff. This is a lesson for all of us. This tragedy has many people on edge. I think we can all benefit from taking a breath. |
Clinton didn't forget anything. They didn't even have proof that he orchestrated the Cole. |
That explanation seems pretty straightforward. But, TOI appears to have a bit more work to do. Another one of their bloggers appears to have the same idea, but just a different vocabulary: http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/1-samuel-1518/ "G-d might be meant to illustrate that voice of the people-the vox populi. In this case, G-d had demanded that Saul (or the “prime minister”) enter into battle with the Amalekites (Hamas and its savage partners) and destroy them utterly even if that means to the last child, cow and goat. As cruel as this appears, it is a lesson that teaches a nation in terrible danger that it has a legitimate obligation to put a definite end to a substantial threat. The end of such a conflict must make it impossible for that enemy to rebuild and continue to vex one’s nation forever." ... "Saul refuses to kill Agag, the king of the Amalekites. In his disobedience, his defying of G-d, is equivalent to our present leadership attempting to fight Hamas while refusing to employ the means to destroy it entirely. " ... "It’s time to take heed of the words of the L-rd, it is time to do what the people of Israel demand, it is time to kill Agag." |
Indeed. (can't seem to embed video today) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLJpjV0RhLg |