should america support Israel?

[The Grand Nudger]

It you want to debate this then get yourself informed. The conflict didn't start yesterday, there is a 2000-year history behind. If you can't handle that then stay out of the discussion.

Um.......Israel hasn't existed that long. Further, those involved are not necessarily "natives" in the sense that palestinians are (and clearly hamas isn't comprised entirely of palestinians)- they are refugees and descendants of refugees themselves (not saying that there are no "native jews" in isreal, or the area that would one day become isreal, but that the vast majority are simply no such thing). I think that the notion that this is some longstanding disagreement between two vested parties is a bit of a stretch. Sure, they may have draped themselves in the mantle, but that doesn't actually mean that it's a factual appraisal of reality, just more propaganda -from both sides-. It's a 70 year conflict about disputed borders and political autonomy - that ghouls from both sides have found occasion to treat as an opportunistic smorgasbord. That the palestinians find themselves the brunt of the thing is no reflection upon themselves entirely, and no amount of handwashing is going to change that. That the palestinians have to step to the table if they want things to change is also beyond arguing - but it cuts both ways. Yes, cease-fires and peace agreements give militant groups time to re-arm, but nobody ever said peace was easy, and we all have to decide how much risk we are willing to entertain in the short term for a long term gain (in this their actions and justifications are no different from anyone elses) - we didn't wall the muslims of new york in when planes crashed into buildings...though, given our history - had it happened enough we just may have). Had we done so, would we really be surprised when we felt some blowback?

[little_monkey]

It you want to debate this then get yourself informed. The conflict didn't start yesterday, there is a 2000-year history behind. If you can't handle that then stay out of the discussion.

Um.......Israel hasn't existed that long.

Get your facts straightened out. Israel was a kingdom way before the the Greek empire and the Roman empire.

Further, those involved are not necessarily "natives" in the sense that palestinians are

The vast majority of Palestinians that influxed the region in the 19th century were Arabs that came from Saudi Arabia. In that same period, there was also an influx of European Jews. So the whole debate of who is a native is quite irrelevant.

That the palestinians find themselves the brunt of the thing is no reflection upon themselves entirely, and no amount of handwashing is going to change that.

The Palestinians declared war in 1948, that's a fact. That they have continue this war since then, that's a fact. That they have sworn the destruction of the state of Israel, that's a fact. That they either tacitly approve or even enable Hamas to carry its attack on Israel, that's a fact.

That the palestinians have to step to the table if they want things to change is also beyond arguing - but it cuts both ways.

Wrong, when you declare a war and lose out, you do not determine the terms of the peace treaty.

Yes, cease-fires and peace agreements give militant groups time to re-arm, but nobody ever said peace was easy, and we all have to decide how much risk we are willing to entertain in the short term for a long term gain (in this their actions and justifications are no different from anyone elses)

There can't be peace when your enemy openly declares his intent to destroy you.

- we didn't wall the muslims of new york in when planes crashed into buildings...though, given our history - had it happened enough we just may have). Had we done so, would we really be surprised when we felt some blowback?

Oh that's swell, apologizing for a terrorist attack!??!

[Brian37]

I am sick of both sides making land claims because prior to both there were polytheists occupying that same land. Go back far enough and our entire species started out in Africa. Humans have always migrated and mixed. Even the Native American's ancestors had to get to America somehow.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Wouldn't be the first time that people lay aside longstanding and seemingly intractable differences to instead harass a common enemy (whether real or perceived).

There's a proverb in that part of the world: Me and my brother against my cousin, me and my cousin against the world.

---

I know I had said I wouldn't reply to you anymore, but there's certainly some shit needing clarity here:

I'd suggest you search out multiple sources, then. I regularly hear Netanyahu justifying the killing of 1300 Palestinians, many non-combatants, due to rocket-firings which haven't killed one-tenth the number of Israelis. And yes, the fact that Hamas puts their batteries in populated ares is itself an atrocity. That doesn't mean that Israel must resort to wholesale invasion to counteract it. Surely that is one "solution", but I'm sure there are others.

As this is being played out in the American media, Israel cannot afford to alienate the American public, so there is a need to portray that Israel is taking every precaution to minimize suffering. But the reality of putting an end to this war is to maximize suffering. So the Israeli leadership has to walk a fine line. But make no mistake, the crying is coming from the Palestinians, not as you wrongly stated that it comes from the Israelis. The Israelis only wish their hands weren't shackled by the Americans. They would gladly do a lot more damage.

You are apparently unable to grip the idea that both sides are complaining about the brutal nature of the enemy. It's really not that difficult to abandon binary thinking.

It you want to debate this then get yourself informed. The conflict didn't start yesterday, there is a 2000-year history behind. If you can't handle that then stay out of the discussion.

I've done plenty of study on the issue. Perhaps you'd be so kind to point out the exact statements which are in error, and refute them with an unbiased source, rather than, "The Israelis are blameless!"

And you have no biases? Wow. I'm flabergasted.

Not in this matter, no. I think that both sides are to blame for the intractable nature of the conflict. I had figured that you weren't particularly smart, but your inability to read simple Emglish is startling. After all, I have said several times in this conversation that I don't hold the Palestinians blameless, and have referred to thier use of civilians as shields to be an "atrocity".

No, the Palestinians alone are to blame for their self-inflicted misery. No one else.

Tommyrot. Israel treats Palestinians like shit, and then acts aggrieved when they fight back. Ray Charles could see the outcome of subjugating an entire people.

There's no ideological blinders, just the facts. It was the Palestinians that declared war not the other way around, a fact you can easily find by reading your history books.

It was the Arab nations that declared war, as anyone who has read a history book knows; the Palestinians had no government to declare war.

Israel has made many blunders along the way, and there are many outstanding issues to be resolved, but none of that matters as long as the Palestinians continue their needless war.

How do you think the war will end while Israel keeps blundering in its treatment of Palestinian civilians? When you oppress people, they tend to fight back. It's not rocket surgery.

You are harping on trivialities. You are free to make whatever claim, and I'm free to interpret your claim in whatever manner I want to. It's called freedom of expression. So cut out the, "Mommy, I didn't meaning this", "Mommy, he's putting words in my mouth", "Mommy, he's misrepresenting my words". Grow up.

What you call "trivialities" are exactly what is prolonging this conflict: settlements expanding even after a promise to stop, practicing collective punishment, economic blockade, and so forth: if those are trivialities to you, then I don't know what to say.

As for your misrepresenting my position, you certainly have done so. You either did it deliberately, or you were unable to parse plain English. Which is it?


Put shortly, you're either stupid or dishonest. Which is it?

[little_monkey]

As this is being played out in the American media, Israel cannot afford to alienate the American public, so there is a need to portray that Israel is taking every precaution to minimize suffering. But the reality of putting an end to this war is to maximize suffering. So the Israeli leadership has to walk a fine line. But make no mistake, the crying is coming from the Palestinians, not as you wrongly stated that it comes from the Israelis. The Israelis only wish their hands weren't shackled by the Americans. They would gladly do a lot more damage.

You are apparently unable to grip the idea that both sides are complaining about the brutal nature of the enemy. It's really not that difficult to abandon binary thinking.

Which part of "war is ugly" don't you understand? Of course both sides would complain about the brutal nature of the enemy. Who wouldn't in a war? But that wasn't my point. My point to you was about the war of images, which Hamas is counting on since Israel has no choice but to bomb the attackers hiding in populated areas, inevitably ensuing large collateral damage. From that perspective, the emotional crying is mainly from Hamas, as this can only tarnish Israel when the media plays contantly images of people being killed, maimed or displaced from their houses turned into rubles. There is no advantage for Israel, but plenty for Hamas. And witnessing the posts on this thread, there are a lot of fools who fall for that propaganda.

No, the Palestinians alone are to blame for their self-inflicted misery. No one else.

Tommyrot. Israel treats Palestinians like shit, and then acts aggrieved when they fight back. Ray Charles could see the outcome of subjugating an entire people.

The history record shows that the Arabs, which includes the Palestinians in case you can't figure that one out, started the war. The misery that this war has brought on falls squarely on the shouders of those who started, which still continues on to this day, namely the Palestinians. But that's too hard for an apologist like you to comprehend.

There's no ideological blinders, just the facts. It was the Palestinians that declared war not the other way around, a fact you can easily find by reading your history books.

It was the Arab nations that declared war, as anyone who has read a history book knows; the Palestinians had no government to declare war.

.. unless you forget to mention that the reason the Palestinians did not have a state, failed to declare their own state at the time because that would have signified the recognition of UN resolution and the state of Israel, which they have openly stated they would never do.

Israel has made many blunders along the way, and there are many outstanding issues to be resolved, but none of that matters as long as the Palestinians continue their needless war.

How do you think the war will end while Israel keeps blundering in its treatment of Palestinian civilians? When you oppress people, they tend to fight back. It's not rocket surgery.

To my estimation, they should bomb until the Palestinians wave the white flag and surrender unconditionally. As it stands, with limited bombings, it's going to be a repetition of 2006, 2008, 2010 and 2012.

You are harping on trivialities. You are free to make whatever claim, and I'm free to interpret your claim in whatever manner I want to. It's called freedom of expression. So cut out the, "Mommy, I didn't meaning this", "Mommy, he's putting words in my mouth", "Mommy, he's misrepresenting my words". Grow up.

What you call "trivialities" are exactly what is prolonging this conflict: settlements expanding even after a promise to stop, practicing collective punishment, economic blockade, and so forth: if those are trivialities to you, then I don't know what to say.

As for your misrepresenting my position, you certainly have done so. You either did it deliberately, or you were unable to parse plain English. Which is it?


Put shortly, you're either stupid or dishonest. Which is it?

No, the trivialities were about you constantly complaining like a 5-year old on how I misinterpret your posts when most of the times I'm correcting you. But you're free to interpret my corrections as a misinterpretation. It's a free country.

As to the issues of "settlements expanding even after a promise to stop, practicing collective punishment, economic blockade, and so forth", again I'm going to ask: which part of "war is ugly" don't you understand? The Palestinians have declared war, have continued their fight to this day, then let them live with the atrocities. Don't come home to mama and complain.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I don't have the time to teach you the English language. And thankfully, that isn't my responsibility. Clearly, your inability to read simple words is hamstringing this conversation.

And likewise, since "war is hell" has become your leitmotif, when shall you take up the cudgel upon the Israelis for their bleating?

Oh, that's right, you won't. You'll simply advocate killing a million or more innocents.

[little_monkey]

I don't have the time to teach you the English language. And thankfully, that isn't my responsibility. Clearly, your inability to read simple words is hamstringing this conversation.

And likewise, since "war is hell" has become your leitmotif, when shall you take up the cudgel upon the Israelis for their bleating?

Oh, that's right, you won't. You'll simply advocate killing a million or more innocents.

Sure, when you can no longer defend your position, resort to ad hominem. Yep, that's really creative. SNORK...

[Crossless2.0]

I don't have the time to teach you the English language. And thankfully, that isn't my responsibility. Clearly, your inability to read simple words is hamstringing this conversation.

And likewise, since "war is hell" has become your leitmotif, when shall you take up the cudgel upon the Israelis for their bleating?

Oh, that's right, you won't. You'll simply advocate killing a million or more innocents.

Sure, when you can no longer defend your position, resort to ad hominem. Yep, that's really creative. SNORK...

Well, you did advocate Israel killing a million Palestinians to end the war, which as a percentage of population is considerably higher than the death toll suffered by Germany or Japan in WWII. That seems a bit extreme. For the sake of argument, would you favor a nuclear strike if it could be done without physically affecting Israel?

[little_monkey]

Sure, when you can no longer defend your position, resort to ad hominem. Yep, that's really creative. SNORK...

Well, you did advocate Israel killing a million Palestinians to end the war, which as a percentage of population is considerably higher than the death toll suffered by Germany or Japan in WWII. That seems a bit extreme. For the sake of argument, would you favor a nuclear strike if it could be done without physically affecting Israel?

What I said was that Israel should bomb until the Palestinians and their leadership surrender unconditionally, and in another post, I also stated that if that takes to kill a million, so be it. What we have is a series of truces, followed by re-arming, and then more rocket attacks, followed by limited bombings, then truce again, and on and on. Obviously this cycle will never end. We have to remove the "limited" and make the bombings so atrocious, so inconceivably horrible that no one will ever want a repeat.


To your question: I would not recommend the use of nukes, simply because it would open the door to other countries to use their nukes to settle their problems. It happened once, the US in Japan, let us not repeat that ever.

[The Grand Nudger]

Obviously this cycle will never end. We have to remove the "limited" and make the bombings so atrocious, so inconceivably horrible that no one will ever want a repeat.

Well, certainly not by -perpetuating- the cycle, no. I'm not really certain that it works that way with human beings, we have short memories for conflict and suffering. Bomb them into dust today and a few generations later they come back even harder - claiming the bombing as the new offense.