Another self-fulfilling prophecy, brought to you by Hillary.

Hillary wasn't even born when these battles began. This pathetic habit of blaming every single thing that happens on her is laughable....especially in that neighborhood.

aligned to Netanyahu than she is with the president she served under.

She will wholeheartedly back all Israeli aggression against its neighbors.

"Aggression against its neighbors"? How about those "neighbors" stop firing rockets into Israel every day? How about they stop randomly stabbing people on the streets? how about they quit trying to blow up cafes and buses?
And certainly you can point out a few savage acts by Israelis too. The difference being that In Israel the thugs get arrested and the palestinians get parades

in celebration and in defense of their soldiers who execute Palestinians in the streets.

Fine, morally sound people in the only democracy in the Middle East.

And the "big parade" couldnt even muster a couple thousand.
Meanwhile, NO palestinian is ever charged by their government when they do their crimes

When people screw with Jews, no one cares.

Jews do it back, and the Jews are always wrong.

Remember, good white people had no problems when Arabs referred to Jews as Dhimmi and treated them like second class citizens with no rights and limited social standing. Remember that these same white people also supported pogroms, expulsions, forced conversions using torture, the Inquisition, the persecution of Jews after the Black Death and to a lesser extent, believed the Protocol of the Elders of Zion and supported Hitler at the beginning (since Nazism was anti-Communist and Stalin was viewed as a greater threat to world peace than Hitler).

Yet, now that the shoe is on the other foot, it's all the Jews' fault. I've heard (and read on DU as well) many times "before Israel, we had no enemies in the Middle East. After Israel, we have no friends." Remember, Joos are always wrong.

And I am Jewish saying this. We are the cause of every social and political problem since the death of Alexander the Great.

And I've never understood this fear/blame of jews/Israel. Likely never will

Why the Roman Empire fell and the Holy Church in Rome took over in the power vacuum, they blamed Jews for the death of their "savior." As a result, people just used them as a scapegoat for everything.

In today's world, it's just 2000 years of traditional Jew hating and Jew bashing. Can't be unlearned. Which is why I will always say that Israel bashing is nothing more than neo Anti-Semitism wrapped up in politically friendly language. If them damn Jews weren't there, the world would be great. But it's all them damn Jews fault.

I have Jewish friends that say "if only we all threw ourselves into the ovens, the world would be a better place" when people bash Israel.

Israel is about the one issue on which American liberals and I split.

And a lot of the furtherest right, in the US anyway, are strong supporters of Israel. I understand the "end times" thing, but theyre definitely not silently backing the Muslims!!

Now, St Augustine, did condemn the Jews for the crime of "Deicide" (Killing of God by Killing Jesus) but was his attempt to justify Christians holding Jewish Slaves. While St Augustine is considered a "Doctor" of the Catholic Church, that concept was OFFICIALLY never adopted by the Catholic Church (but it kept coming back til the 1800s when someone wanted to justify Slavery and even was used by the Nazis).

During the Dark Ages, most Jews lived in the Rhine Valley under papal protection (or in Spain under Moslem protection). You do hear of Jews being killed but those stories are rare during the Dark Ages. and many are just comments that Jews were Killed, just like in other reports it was reported, Franks, German, Poles and later Moslems were killed. Prior to the Crusades you just do not see such mass killing of Jews. Jews were discriminated against and could not hold positions in the Governments of Western Europe (With the exception of Moslem Spain, and then only for brief time periods).

With the Crusades you start to see such attacks, but mostly in Palestine as oppose to Europe (when Jerusalem fell to the First Crusade you saw a massive massacre of the people living in that city, but that was typical of most cities that fell to troops storming the walls of any city, thus by the 1700s you had a "Rule of War" that if a wall was breached, the City would surrender, for if it did not and instead tried to stop the troops pouring into that hole in the wall, if the attempt to fill the breach failed, the attacking troops would end up killing everyone is such cities, mostly do to that fact that the "blood was up". Thus if a City Surrendered you rarely saw the citizens massacred, but if it ended up being taken by force, you always had a massive massacre).

In England, you had no Anti-Jewish laws till after the Conquest, then starting in 1218 you saw a slow increase in Anti-Jewish laws, ending in 1290, but this appears to be more the King of England wanted money so he rob the Jews of their wealth and then kicked them out of the country, so the King could see how much money they tried to take with them, and grabbed that money to.

With the Black Death, Jews were blamed for spreading it, even after the Pope pointed out Jews were dying at the same rate as Christians. Do to the Black Death and stories that Jews Spread it, England expelled in Jewish Population, who could not return to England till the rule of Oliver Cromwell in the 1657. Martin Luther was a rabid Anti-Semite and in many ways made it respectable in Protestant Europe (but rejected by the Puritans such as Oliver Cromwell).

While Catholic Spain was expelling Jews in the 1500s, Catholic Poland was permitting them to settle. This had more to do with Spanish concerns that the Jews would support an Arab invasion or revolt in Spain against the Catholic Rules of Spain more then anything else. Poland had no such worries, its concerns was Orthodox Russia and Lutheran Sweden, both much more Anti-Semitic then Catholic Poland (While technically the Ottoman Empire was to Poland's South, by the 1500s the Ottomans had already fallen into the trap of the Sultan wanted to be at the head of the Army AND control Constantinople. Thus any attack had to be within three to six months march from Constantinople, and given the Carpathian mountains, Poland was just to far away. With the defeat of Sweden by Peter the Great of Russia in the early 1700s, Prussia rose to be the main threat to Poland, and again the Jews were NOT seen as an internal security threat (as had been the case in Spain in the 1500s).

Now overt Antisemitism did not occur in Poland during the 1200s to the 1700s, local problems did pop up but nothing the local religious leaders and Politicians could not handle. The Pogroms of the 1800s was the result of Poland being divided in the 1700s, and then partially united by Napoleon and then that rump being annexed by Russia after the Napoleonic War (which resulted in most Jews in Europe coming under Russian Rule in Poland).

While Religion played a part in European Antisemitism (St Augustine and Martin Luther are two examples of religious intolerance for Jews and lets not forget Torquemada and the Spanish Inquisition), in most cases the problem was less religion then economic (England's expelling the Jews in the 1200s more to rob them then for being non-Christians) or internal security concerns (Spain's concerns about Moslem revolts in Spain even as late as the 1600s, there were Moors in Spain that late, and the Spanish fear that the Jews may join the Moors in any Moorish revolt or invasion of Spain, this was the reason real for the Spanish Inquisition, the King of Spain never really had control over most of Spain during the 1500-1800s, Spain was more a group of different countries with one king, but different parliaments and bureaucracies, something hard to understand today).

Until Hitler, Jews did suffer discrimination and had to live in their own communities (from which we get the term Ghetto today, restrictions on where Jews could live started to end in the 1600s, but only became widely accepted in the 1800s) and occasionally faced acts of violence, but the later was rare, but NOT unheard of. You had more Anti-Jewish in Protestant lands then in Catholic Lands or even Orthodox lands, but Orthodox Russia really treated Jews bad in Catholic Poland). It took Hitler to go that extra step to making killing Jews acceptable and Hitler view on Jews was based on Race and Nationalism not Religion.

Side note: Watch some reports on Antisemitism prior to 1800. It existed but many citation that are used to show such Antisemitism were NOT intended for that purpose at all. The Classic Case was the Pope, when he ruled the Papal States, would have the head Rabbi of Rome come to his Palace and give the Pope the taxes from the Jewish Ghetto. The lead Rabbi would then prepared to be kicked, which the Pope did. On its face it sounds Antisemitic, but once you realized HOW people sent out messages to large group of people BEFORE Radio, Microphones, and even Newspapers which was to do Acts in Public. Thus a King would Knight a Knight by putting his sword on the Knights Shoulders and then Punch him. The tapping on the Shoulders was to show the world, the man was a Knight, the Punch would show that only THAT KING COULD DISCIPLINE THAT KNIGHT AND THAT KNIGHT ACCEPTED THAT THE KING HAD THAT RIGHT. The Catholic ceremony of Conformation, where the Bishop does a light "Slap" on the person's check also derived from that time period, it shows two things, that the Bishop had to right to discipline that Catholic on issues of Religion AND that person accepting that right. Back to the Pope kicking the Rabbi, that was a show that only the POPE had to right to punish the Jews of Rome and the Rabbi accepting that kick was the Rabbi's acceptance that only the Pope could discipline the Jews of Rome. i.e. No one else in Rome could do anything to "punish" the Jews, that right was reserved to the Pope (like the right to Punish a Knight was reserved to the King that Knighted the Knight). Thus the act of the Pope Kicking the Rabbi was NOT Antisemitic at all, but just a Public Acknowledgment of the relationship between the Pope and the Jews of Rome for that is how you SHOW people of that relationship when most people do NOT have access to anything close to modern communications. Watch for such "Acts" being cited as Antisemitism, I have read many such comments saying such acts were Antisemitic but once you understand HOW it was done and WHY it was reported, it was someone saying by his actions "I am your Leader" and the other person saying by his actions "I agree you are my leader".

Today we do that on the Net, in the 1800s we seen people do it via the Newspapers (Pulp Paper was only invented in 1801). Thus even as late as the 1850s Linen, i.e. Cloth, was the paper being used and think about it, would you pay what a T-Shirt costs for a paper to read once and throw away? That was the price of Newspapers prior to the widespread adoption of Pulp Papers in the 1840s and 1850s. Pulp Paper lead to people getting their news from Newspapers as oppose to seeing it themselves OR getting it from the Pulpit, thus people doing "Public Acts" to show people the relationship between two people became less and less common starting about 1800, but prior to 1800 such public acts were a way to SHOW the relationship between two people (another example of this, the Moslem General who actually took Spain from the Goths in the 700s, when his King arrived laid down on the ground so his king could walk all over him, thus to show his troops that the King was truly the top dog in the Moslem hierarchy not him, even through he can conquered Spain). We do NOT need to do such public acts, we can now spread that situation via the net. I bring it up for you have to understand HOW people did things in the past, and that is often different from what we do today because we have the Net (only since 1990), TV (only since 1947), Radio (only since 1920) and Newspapers ( as something we would call a Newspaper today since only about 1850, you did have something called a Newspaper as early as the 1500s, but those were intended to be reused for months if not years do to the cost of the paper to make such newspapers, thus price wise more like a well made hard back book today then a newspaper today).

it will be a honest to god conventional war with all that implies.

supplying arms and ammo to ISIS isn't quite getting the job done so they'll eventually look for a reason to start another war against Lebanon.

They lost the last one against Hezbollah (in 2006), so they probably are hoping for a little getback.

So Hezbollah beat the Israeli's in battle and advanced into Israel? lol

The conflict was precipitated by the Zar'it-Shtula incident. On 12 July 2006, Hezbollah fighters fired rockets at Israeli border towns as a diversion for an anti-tank missile attack on two armored Humvees patrolling the Israeli side of the border fence.The ambush left three soldiers dead.

Started it and as usual got their butts kicked, just not as bad as usual, which I guess is a "win". lol

The Israelis suffered about 1.6 percent casualties for the entire 2006 campaign, while Hezbollah suffered some 13 percent casualties.

I'm glad you pointed out how silly that "lost" claim was

The Israelis ended having to pull back after attacking Lebanon and being unable to defeat Hezbollah, but we don't hear apologists for Israel talking about the rockets and missiles firing down upon the Lebanese do we?

Israel, like the US, tends to pick on adversaries who aren't as well-equipped and can't really put up a fair fight. Hezbollah was a little better armed than Israel's usual targets (little kids, elderly women and other dire threats) and Israel's withdrawal was viewed as a defeat for the mythic IDF.

Israel, again, like the US, tends to utilize radical Islamic mercenaries like ISIS to fight and die for their strategic goals because their blood is too precious to be spilled when they can get others to do it for them.

And Hezbollah to "win" would have to defeat Israel and make that the reason they pulled out, not due to a United Nations-brokered ceasefire. The Israeli ground forces wanted to advance to the Litani River and push Hezbollah out of the area and they did.
The resolution, which was approved by both the Lebanese and Israeli governments the following days, called for disarmament of Hezbollah, for withdrawal of the IDF from Lebanon, and for the deployment of the Lebanese Armed Forces and an enlarged United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) in the south.

Israel honored their part of the deal, but Hezbollah didn't disarm.

Even local countries faulted Hezbollah, with the obvious exceptions.

Among neighboring Middle Eastern nations, Iran, Syria, and Yemen voiced strong support for Hezbollah, while the Arab League, Egypt, and Jordan issued statements criticizing Hezbollah's actions and declaring support for Lebanon. Saudi Arabia found Hezbollah entirely responsible. Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Iraq, the Palestinian Authority, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain agreed with the Saudi stance that Hezbollah's actions were "unexpected, inappropriate and irresponsible acts."

British military historian John Keegan stated that the outcome of the war was "misreported as an Israeli defeat" due to anti-Israel bias in the international media. He concluded that Hezbollah had suffered heavy losses, and that a cease-fire came into effect before Israel could completely dislodge Hezbollah from its positions.

The Israeli forces certainly could have done better, they were rusty in their conventional war skills from too much training in just COIN. (Counterinsurgency Operations)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Lebanon_War

It upsets a few apple carts

spoke out against Hezbollah because they are as close to Israel as the US is.

This is why Israel hasn't lifted one finger to combat an ISIS takeover right next door and why Hezbollah has been one of the main groups fighting ISIS.

Maybe you should read up on that. Hizbollah/Hamas/etc ALWAYS use civilians to hide behind. The Israelis even go so far as to often warn civilians before they blow up buildings. The terrorists, on the other hand, encourage civilians to stay and become martyrs protecting them. They also target Israeli civilians intentionally continually

The Israelis didnt 'have" to pull back, they saw no reason to continue further into Lebanon. Hizbullah was defeated in every aspect.
Next time maybe Israel WONT go easy and will actually destroy 90% of them. Of curse, the ones left breathing will still claim victory

But it is your right to continue to support murderous savages that would take YOUR head off too, if they had the chance

ever halted an airstrike because of the presence of innocents? Gimme a break 7962.

When you're packed as tight as sardines in a can in an open-air prison like Gaza, there is no safe place for innocents. The "human shield" slur is a damn lie used to justify the deliberate targeting on non-combatants. If the IDF really cared about hitting their intended targets and not innocents, they would send in ground forces en masse to make sure to limit collateral damage, but collateral damage is what they're actually seeking.

Just as they got away with deliberately attacking the USS Liberty and crushing American Rachel Corrie beneath a bulldozer, they get away with their barbarity because of the US.

Now who are the real savages again?

Its done many times and been caught on film. They also openly praise those who do it.
You can also find plenty of clips showing the Israelis dropping leaflets warning of an impending strike.
You gotta go all the way back to the Liberty? You can find "palestinian" savagery most every day.

If they REALLY sought collateral damage, the whole place would be a wasteland in a matter of days. They could just bulldoze the whole place all the way to the desert. But they dont.
And every time they allow any of the terrorists out, then Hamas/Hizbullah/whatever-group-of-losers claims "victory", simply because Israel didnt kill them all.

How about asking the neighboring Arab countries why THEY dont do something about the situation in Gaza? Because most neighboring Arab countries actually help Israel to try to contain them. They learned years ago what was best for them was to do the smart thing & quit fighting. Maybe one day the palestinians will learn that. Then they may actually make progress. Until then, I dont lose any sleep over them at all. They've made their bed, let them lie in it.

slowly being pushed off of the land of their ancestors and being replaced by people from other parts of the world, many of whom have no link to the land at all besides some mythical religious ideas. I've often wondered why the Israelis just don't hold go in and do to the Palestinians what European invaders did to the Native Americans (genocide), but I think they are still somewhat restrained by the fact that they are trying to maintain this image as a small democratic nation under constant siege - this narrative fits their desire to bulldoze, confiscate/steal land until they get the amount of land they want.

If the Israelis know for sure that Hamas is encouraging people to be human shields, that sure doesn't prevent them from dropping their bombs huh? I guess when Israel was bombing those UN-operated hospitals and shelters in Gaza, they did so because there were potentially human shields and a Hamas member somewhere among them?

People like you can cavalierly excuse Israel's war against the Palestinians, but there will come a day when Israel is forced to stop doing what it's been doing since 1948, and that will happen in the same way it happened to South Africa (the other apartheid, racist regime that Israel and the US supported). It is inevitable in a world in which money if often the largest stimulus to change.

And for the most part they've all held up well. Because common sense prevails in most places. They have all pretty much tired of the constant "plight" of the palestinians. If they really cared much, they would take part in a solution.Jordan wont even let them out of the refugee camps. Why not? Why not give some land for them to have a larger territory? After all, Israel & Jordan were all part of the same area before '48, why shouldnt they offer up a little? Because they dont really care either.
The palestinians could have peace if they wanted it, but they continue with their childish antics like not having Israel on any maps and the majority insisting that Israel go away completely
People dont worry about Jews cutting their heads off or insisting on laws being changed to suit them. I'll side with the group thats civilized

to land of their own, and it's in what is now Israel.

They shouldn't have to leave for Jordan or any of the other artificial countries created by white folks from Europe.

The whole Israeli project is a continuation of old school European global expansionism, and this is why most of the rest of the world who has also been through Europe's colonial wave (from Asia, Africa and Latin America) isn't too fond of Israel.

If Israel would just come out and admit the obvious to world (that they aren't interested in peace with the Palestinians, but want them to leave so they can expand Israel out to proper biblical proportions) then it would save everyone a lot of grief.

Trans Jordan was the initial area. But folks like you want to put it ALL on Israel, which is why nothing will happen. They have as much historical claim to the land as the palestinians, if not MORE.

from various countries around the world have a "historical claim" to that land, moreso than the people who were living there before being expelled? Their historical land is in Europe.

I guess if a group of Congolese Africans adopted a religion that said that England is their rightful, divinely-given land and they invaded and occupied London, you'd think there was some legitimacy there right?

Don't give me the religious view of history because I don't buy it. Israel is purely about European colonialism of the type that existed back during the days of the scramble for Africa. Nothing divine or spiritual about it at all. In fact, the current strife in the Middle East can be attributed to European nation-building in the early to mid 1900's.

There was no European colonialism thousands of years ago.
Jews have maintained ties to that area for nearly 4000 years. No independent Arab or Palestinian state ever existed in Palestine.
No mention of "Palestine" anywhere in the Koran. They always considered themselves part of Syria until the talk of reforming the original Israel began. They're even quoted saying as much.
Palestinian nationalism is more a product of the 20th century than anything else.
And Israel will continue to do what they have to do to protect themselves. The Palestinians can have peace as soon as they renounce violence. So far they havent, so they'll continue to live on the losing side of everything. Tough shit.

"have maintained ties to that area" for millenia or not. This doesn't give them the right drive hundreds of thousands of people off of the lands they have been living on in order to import others from around the world. If you're excusing this then you apparently see no problem with the way the Native American population was pushed off of American land (and in some cases driven to extinction).

You can't make peace with people who deny your existence and intend to drive you from your homes, and that is exactly what Israel intends to do. The onus is on Israel to make peace, to give it's expansionist desires, be happy with what they currently have, and foster good relations with their neighbors. The Palestinians should recognize Israel's right to exist when the Israelis recognize their right to exist - it's a two-way street.

Israel, like the US, exists, but also like the US, it doesn't have a "right" to exist. There's a big difference.

Its always the palestinians who refuse to acknowledge Israel and refuse to stop supporting terrorist groups as their leaders.
And if their plight was SO important, the rest of the Arab world would be bending over backwards to help them. Instead, most work WITH Israel to improve security. Why? Because they, too, have tired of the constant whining & self victimization of the palestinians.
You continue to dismiss any responsibility of Jordan, which shows you're not actually concerned about the palestinians as much as punishing Israel. Jordan was cut from the same swath as israel, so they should be willing to donate some land just like the Israelis have. The palestinians only left because the Arab nations of '48 told them to leave. Then after the destruction of Israel, they could go back. Israel didnt force them all out. But it didnt work out that way. When you always pick the losing team, you always lose.

in the Middle East are more interested in pleasing the US and Israel than doing anything at all to stand for the rights of Palestinians. They are all a bunch of sellouts who'd rather kiss white folks behinds than call them out for their lack of humanity. They like getting those yearly payments and being on the safe side of the world's hegemonic military/economic power and its main Middle Eastern ally. I have no respect for Jordan and it's ass-kissing king.

So now you're wanting to revise history to absolve the Israelis of any responsibility for pushing the Palestinians off their ancestral lands, as if it wasn't an extremely violent event involving bloodshed? You sound like the racists in America who try to absolve their ancestors of participating in slavery by saying Africans sold other Africans into it. What you're saying and your revisionism is just as bad as Holocaust deniers, and people like you who are super pro-Israel would be throwing a tantrum if someone did that. You want to diminish and dismiss everyone else's suffering, yet you expect the whole world to empathize with Jewish suffering during WWII.

The Palestinians didn't "donate" their homes to Israelis anymore than Native Americans "donated" their land to European invaders. Your view of history is so one-sided and bias that it verges on sick and mentally twisted. I don't think you're a very rational person and I can see that it's a waste of time even trying to reason with you at all.

Jews also have legitimate security concerns with many folks there who want them all dead.

Hell, they wanted them dead well before 1967 and 1948, so you don't get to use that as an excuse either.

If they didn't go to war with the Jews and accepted partition in 1947, there would be no refugees.

The Israelis have also offered the Palestinians their own state several times since 1947 that would effectively end the occupation and any bullshit apartheid claims you have. The Palestinians rejected each & every offer for their own state because they want to deny the Jews their rights to their own state in their indigenous historic homeland.

If you were really concerned for the human rights of people in that region, you'd have a big problem with Palestinian terror, all their rejections of peace, their corrupt leaders, and their brutal rule over Palestinians who they control. It wouldn't hurt for you to show some empathy for Jews either.

Instead, all I ever see from your side is intolerance & hate.

Apparently he also believes its all the "white folks" fault now too.
I just dont get it. Want peace? Quit trying to kill everybody all the time!!

Last edited Thu May 5, 2016, 05:33 PM - Edit history (1)

Jews have been living in Israel, Judea, Sameria, Levant and Mahgreb for more that 3000 years.

They are the equivalent of Native Americans and are surrounded by states created by the British and French.

The Arabs are from Arabia, they invaded the Levant and Mahgreb when they were spreading their religion through violence, just like the Christians did.

Read some history dude.

Thats about the 3rd post you bring race into it. You realize a lot of the people you easily disparage are not actually "white"? Or do you just not give a shit as long as you can get your insult across? Showing racism against Jews & whites isnt exactly a bonus for your argument.

My view of history is that of ACTUAL history, not made up bullshit foisted upon us by the whining palestinian apologists.
No one told the Indians to leave and when the settlers were defeated they could come back and reclaim their land. Your comparison is ridiculous. Thats exactly what happened with the palestinian exodus. NOT because the Israelis tossed them out, they left thinking they'd be back as soon as the Arab nations got rid of Israel. Thats a fact whether you like it or not. Arabs who DIDNT leave are still living in Israel.
Do I think Israel has done no wrong? Certainly not. Neither has the US. But I'll darn sure back up a bunch of Israelis over a bunch of murderous thugs who want the total destruction of Israel as their goal.
You can stew all you want about it, Israel isnt going ANYWHERE. The sooner the palestinians realize that, the better for them.

because the whole idea of Zionism and the establishment of Israel came about during the days of colonialism, the days when white (yes, white people) Europeans went on a murderous rampage of killing, rape and thievery on every piece of land on the face of this earth. I lump the Israeli project in with it because it is exactly the same thing. You may want to see it as something different entirely, but for many people of color who are aware of world history like myself, Israel is no different than the settler projects in South Africa or in what became the US.

Since race is mainly a social construct laid out to determine societal privileges, the European Jews who dominate Israel are usually classified as white and many of them hold very racist views of Arabs and treat them accordingly. If it looks like a racist, it probably is a racist. That's not racism, that's fact.

In non-European lands of this world, in countries that have a history of being traumatized by European savagery, many of them can clearly see what has been happening in the Middle East for what it is - another colonial project.

Yes, I view world history since at least the 1400's to the present as one large rampage by Europeans against the rest of the world. Kind of like a malignant virus unleashed upon humanity that is slowly but surely starting to recede. That's just the way I see it so you'll know where I'm coming from.

And guess what, "people of color" have done a lot of bad shit in the world as well.
I suppose the views the Arabs have of the Jews arent racist at all, right?
The Europeans werent alone in "murderous rampages" either. You forget the Muslim Hordes? The Mongolians?
ALL races have their own bad history. Its just that some of them want to perpetuate the misery like it still WAS 1400.

Well, Bush, Obama and Maybe now Hillary will keep on track with the Project for the New American Century. They have destroyed Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria and Lebanon is next. If elected Hillary will give Net. all the fire power and support he needs to destroy Lebanon.

What about the American University of Beirut and the American Community School? Don't our leaders care about fourth generation Americans in Beirut who have kept those fine institutions alive for over a century. AUB and ACS have educated many generations of
people all over the Arab World. Why can't the U.S. repeat this all over the Middle East instead of killing people to bring them democracy while grabbing their resources?

If you vote for Hillary, you will get more war in the Middle East and trouble elsewhere.

What is Clinton going to sell them that they don't already have?

You're going to "get more war in the ME and trouble elsewhere" no matter who is in the White House. Sanders won't stop the warring parties of this planet from doing what they want to do - how much traction has Obama gotten in trying to stop further settlement in the West Bank?

The constant DU drumbeat of "she'll start another war" is really tiresome. Every thread, no matter how tenuous the relation, it gets trotted out. You know who's more likely to start another war? ANY FUCKING REPUBLICAN.

Not sure they want to pick a fight at this time or Iran stands to lose all their Imperial influence in the Arab world.

who can see Israel for what it really is - an apartheid-based, Spartan regime that is a serial violator of human rights, human dignity, and in violation of many of the global norms agreed upon by humanity. It happens everywhere, but Israel is the most notable because they can carry out mass slaughters and continue on without any repercussions.

Morally, Israel is no better than either Hezbollah and Hamas.

Last edited Tue Apr 26, 2016, 09:48 AM - Edit history (1)

Like Hamas who calls for the murder of all Jews.





"Morally, Israel is no better than either Hezbollah and Hamas."

If you believe that you are either an anti-semite or a moron.

hold rallies on a consistent basis calling for the death of all Arabs. Let's not forget that most of the Israeli population praised the Israeli soldier who executed the wounded Palestinian in the street. Let's also not forget the Israelis who brought out lawn chairs and drinks to cheer on the IDF dropping bombs on Gaza.

Don't pretend that doesn't happen just because the American media won't say anything about it.

You don't have to be an anti-Semite or a moron to see that Israel is just as morally bankrupt as any of their Arab neighbors.

Is some of it legitimate? Of course.

I have said a few times "That as a supporter of Israel someone needs to save them from themselves." Many myself included criticize Bibi BECUSE we support Israel.

The key difference of the rallies is there not government sponsored.


In terms of "population praised the Israeli soldier who executed the wounded Palestinian in the street" The silent majority of Americans rally behind cops when they shoot unarmed people. Kind of a pot a kettle situation.

And remember the military CHARGED the solider. Authorities in the United States go out of their way to clear cops when they shoot an unarmed citizen.

"Let's also not forget the Israelis who brought out lawn chairs and drinks to cheer on the IDF dropping bombs on Gaza."

The American media did report on that. I remember several articles in the New York Times and a few in the Washington Post. While I don't support that kind I behavior I believe that it's general human nature to want to see those you perceive as your enemy suffer. Hamas has fired more then 5,000 rockets at Israel. Since Hamas caused them to suffer the people who cheered on the bombing fell back on the natural desire for revenge.

Lets also not forget religion. Both the Jews and the Muslims think that god gave them this land. Once they hear god talking to them all other rational thought goes out the window.

Although I've only seen a report of ONE rally to support that soldier, and it was sparsely attended. As you said, the troop has been charged. Had the roles been reversed, there would have been a parade through Gaza for the guy.

The terror fan club grows.

some very angry Gods there that are the core systems of many of these warring fractions of humanes who continue to prophesize death and destruction must occur before serenity is an absolute...if ever