# News & Current Events > World News & Affairs >  Israel: An issue many in the liberty movement get wrong

## Massachusetts

I have observed many debates on foreign policy on RPF, DP, and countless other liberty-oriented sites. A trend I have noticed is the anti-Israel sentiments and the downright hatred of Israel.

Many in the liberty movement are so off on this issue for a few reasons:

1) Israel is our strongest ally in the part of the world where folks are the most hostile toward the United States. The United States has spent a long time playing Russian Roulette with countries in the Middle East (i.e. arming ISIS in Syria, and fighting against them in Iraq)..but Israel has *almost always been our ally.

2) The anger is directed towards Israel as if they are our enemy. You can disagree with actions that Israel takes in terms of military strategy without expressing hatred of Israel and their people.

3) The power of the AIPAC lobby - just like liberals broadly lump in all gun owners in with the NRA, it is unfair to broadly lump all the folks in Israel with AIPAC. The anger should be dedicated towards the politicians who allow AIPAC to have such a heavy influence on their decision making when it comes to foreign policy - not Israel.

4) The foreign aid the United States sends to Israel isn't Israel's fault. If you were offered billions in aid from the United States, would you say NO? Absolutely not. The anger here should be directed towards our politicians who try to buy influence with foreign leaders using foreign aid as a tool to do so.

In conclusion, the anger directed towards Israel for many controversial topics should be directed elsewhere. You can be critical of Israel for specific actions they take, just as you would be critical of the United States for specific actions they take. It is just this guy's opinion that it is absurd to oppose everything that Israel, an ally of the United States, does. It is a subject that I think is a sore spot in the liberty movement that should be addressed moving forward. Just my take.

I welcome any criticism and/or concurrence with what I have laid out in this thread. I look forward to receiving your feedback, RPF.

----------


## green73

> You can disagree with actions that Israel takes in terms of military strategy without expressing hatred of Israel and their people.


Stopped reading here. For $#@! sake. $#@! off. We are not anti-semites or do we hate Israelis.

----------


## Massachusetts

> Stopped reading here. For $#@! sake. $#@! off. We are not anti-semites or do we hate Israelis.


That isn't my point at all. My point is that a lot of the anger directed towards Israel for their political clout in the United States is being directed at the wrong person(s). Want to blame somebody? Blame irresponsible politicians in the United States, whether they be Democrat or Republican. I believe that we should support our allies - not unconditionally - but there is an instinct on the part of many to condemn Israel regardless of the context of the situation. I disagree with that instinct.

----------


## green73

> That isn't my point at all. My point is that a lot of the anger directed towards Israel for their political clout in the United States is being directed at the wrong person(s). Want to blame somebody? Blame irresponsible politicians in the United States, whether they be Democrat or Republican. I believe that we should support our allies - not unconditionally - but there is an instinct on the part of many to condemn Israel regardless of the context of the situation. I disagree with that instinct.


Of course. It always comes down to politicians. That's why gov't doesn't work. Anything that takes politicians to function is doomed to fail. If you believe in free markets you have to agree.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> I have observed many debates on foreign policy on RPF, DP, and countless other liberty-oriented sites. A trend I have noticed is the anti-Israel sentiments and the downright hatred of Israel.
> 
> Many in the liberty movement are so off on this issue for a few reasons:
> 
> 1) Israel is our strongest ally in the part of the world where folks are the most hostile toward the United States. The United States has spent a long time playing Russian Roulette with countries in the Middle East (i.e. arming ISIS in Syria, and fighting against them in Iraq)..but Israel has always been our ally.
> 
> 2) The anger is directed towards Israel as if they are our enemy. You can disagree with actions that Israel takes in terms of military strategy without expressing hatred of Israel and their people.
> 
> 3) The power of the AIPAC lobby - just like liberals broadly lump in all gun owners in with the NRA, it is unfair to broadly lump all the folks in Israel with AIPAC. The anger should be dedicated towards the politicians who allow AIPAC to have such a heavy influence on their decision making when it comes to foreign policy - not Israel.
> ...


1) Israel isn't our best ally. The benefits that the American people might theoretically gain from the relationship is negated by the fact that we are more likely to be attacked, and have been attacked, for going down this road of entangling alliances. The United States supplies Israel with weaponry that often violates conventions, said weaponry is used on Palestinians, (whether you believe justifiably so or not is a moot point) various factions in the Middle East and elsewhere point to the mangled corpses of innocent men, women, and children and sell a tale about a so-called American war on Islam. Statements made by prominent neoconservative talking heads only serves to reinforce that perception. Many are recruited, radicalized, and convinced that a life of war against the United States, and anyone happening to be from there, is moral, righteous, and their duty. These aren't soldiers who are largely paid to fight. They will keep using guerrilla tactics and attacking Americans at every opportunity. We shouldn't be there.

Not simply that, Israel would have an incentive to work towards peaceful relationships with its neighbors if the United States was not artificially propping them up.

2) Israel has attacked us before. The people of Israel are not 'our' enemy, but the government of Israel certainly doesn't much have any qualms about committing acts of war against the United States. Israel bombs hospitals, schools, their forces shoot down innocent children, their munitions (often supplied by the United States) cause excruciating and slow deaths of many innocent people. It is not in the individuals of the United States interest to sponsor these things. Sure, a few Americans prosper greatly. A few receive oil drilling contracts, military welfare, and various other self-enriching, crony-capitalist plots and schemes are realized.

3) It's not simply the politicians who have become utterly subservient to the will of AIPAC, it is the American people who have been taught many of the things you say. "They are our best ally in the Middle East" etc. (they aren't, and regardless, we shouldn't be there). Many's interpretation of the Bible and fanatical aspirations to promote an apocalypse signifying the Second Coming of Christ is to blame as well. They equate Israel, the modern day state, to Israel that is mentioned in the Bible. It's quite amazing that the only bills and/or resolutions that can pass with unanimous consent are the bills to give Israel more money, or reconfirm the undying, eternal, entangling relationship (or other pointless theatrics for politicians to point to on how much they supported Israel when they travel home). It's sickening.

4) Many in Israel actively call for the aid. Many in America actively offer it. Regardless of all that, yes, they should deny it. And yes, America should not be offering it. What do they want? Sovereignty? Or to be an American puppet state? As the relationship stands, considering how much our policy is dictated by Israel, and not vise versa, I'd say "we" are the puppets.

In short, I just deny, in full, that there is any benefit to be had by our alliance with Israel. We should trade with all nations. Not be tied to the hip with them. We are broke and can't afford it, it leads to us being attacked and gets us into wars, and it promotes death and hostility.

----------


## Massachusetts

> 1) Israel isn't our best ally. The benefits that the American people might theoretically gain from the relationship is negated by the fact that we are more likely to be attacked, and have been attacked, for going down this road of entangling alliances. The United States supplies Israel with weaponry that often violates conventions, said weaponry is used on Palestinians, (whether you believe justifiably so or not is a moot point) various factions in the Middle East and elsewhere point to the mangled corpses of innocent men, women, and children and sell a tale about a so-called American war on Islam. Statements made by prominent neoconservative talking heads only serves to reinforce that perception. Many are recruited, radicalized, and convinced that a life of war against the United States, and anyone happening to be from there, is moral, righteous, and their duty. These aren't soldiers who are largely paid to fight. They will keep using guerrilla tactics and attacking Americans at every opportunity. We shouldn't be there.
> 
> Not simply that, Israel would have an incentive to work towards peaceful relationships with its neighbors if the United States was not artificially propping them up.
> 
> 2) Israel has attacked us before. The people of Israel are not 'our' enemy, but the government of Israel certainly doesn't much have any qualms about committing acts of war against the United States. Israel bombs hospitals, schools, their forces shoot down innocent children, their munitions (often supplied by the United States) cause excruciating and slow deaths of many innocent people. It is not in the individuals of the United States interest to sponsor these things. Sure, a few Americans prosper greatly. A few receive oil drilling contracts, military welfare, and various other self-enriching, crony-capitalist plots and schemes are realized.
> 
> 3) It's not simply the politicians who have become utterly subservient to the will of AIPAC, it is the American people who have been taught many of the things you say. "They are our best ally in the Middle East" etc. (they aren't, and regardless, we shouldn't be there). Many's interpretation of the Bible and fanatical aspirations to promote an apocalypse signifying the Second Coming of Christ is to blame as well. They equate Israel, the modern day state, to Israel that is mentioned in the Bible. It's quite amazing that the only bills and/or resolutions that can pass with unanimous consent are the bills to give Israel more money, or reconfirm the undying, eternal, entangling relationship (or other pointless theatrics for politicians to point to on how much they supported Israel when they travel home). It's sickening.
> 
> 4) Many in Israel actively call for the aid. Many in America actively offer it. Regardless of all that, yes, they should deny it. And yes, America should not be offering it. What do they want? Sovereignty? Or to be an American puppet state? As the relationship stands, considering how much our policy is dictated by Israel, and not vice versa, I'd say "we" are the puppets.
> ...


KC I really enjoyed reading this response and I share many of the same concerns you do about our relationship with Israel; however, how do you address the instinct of many folks in the liberty movement to always condemn Israel and ignore the behavior of other countries? (I ask you this, but I understand you can't explain the behavior of other people)

For example, if there is a story about Israel attacking a country, there is a lot of commentary and finger wagging pointed in Israel's direction...but if another country commits the same treacherous act, there is silence? I get the sense there is animosity towards Israel.

----------


## acptulsa

Are we getting money for this thread?  'Cause it ain't just the District of Calamity that's being sponsored by the Zionists.  If they can subsidize 90% of the televangelist channels on the airwaves, seems like they can pay this site to host _this_ paid commercial program...

----------


## Bryan

> Are we getting money for this thread?  'Cause it ain't just the District of Calamity that's being sponsored by the Zionists.  If they can subsidize 90% of the televangelist channels on the airwaves, seems like they can pay this site to host _this_ paid commercial program...


No one is paying us, and if there were such a sponsor there would be a notice. If anyone else is being paid to post here they need to disclose that relationship, per the guidelines.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> KC I really enjoyed reading this response and I share many of the same concerns you do about our relationship with Israel; however, how do you address the instinct of many folks in the liberty movement to always condemn Israel and ignore the behavior of other countries? (I ask you this, but I understand you can't explain the behavior of other people)
> 
> For example, if there is a story about Israel attacking a country, there is a lot of commentary and finger wagging pointed in Israel's direction...but if another country commits the same treacherous act, there is silence? I get the sense there is animosity towards Israel.


A lot of it has to do with the resentment many hold after witnessing the sort of power Israeli interests wield on American politics. That and to try to convince people that this isn't in our interests as well as to show the true extent of what our tax dollars go towards. I don't mention Uganda much because the foreign policy relationship is quite different from ours with Israel. It isn't usually, though some do dwell on Israel as the cause of the world's grief (whether for bigoted, conspiracy related [and I say that loosely] or prophetic grounds), that the majority of libertarians (and various other foreign policy commentators), or rather, people who follow world events and the news more so than the average, unnecessarily attack Israel. A lot of the criticism is warranted. Now for the average person, sure, it might come off a certain way. I know people who think that a coming apocalypse, which will be started in modern day Israel, will bring about their eternal bliss. They get incredibly defensive at the mention of even a penny being cut. And that's one thing to believe that, but these people vote, and they lobby and they promote this message in ways that affects me. So that's a little bit why Israel is often discussed while other nations committing atrocities are sometimes overlooked, or the outrage seems minimal.  

No doubt about it, many have animosity towards Israel. I see something passed, another few billion in aid, or whatever, 433-2. 99-1. That annoys me. Then I see numbers of what the war in Afghanistan and Iraq will cost (Bin Laden being largely motivated by US support of Israel and their treatment of Palestinians, as well as our presence in Saudi Arabia and the tragedy of sanctioning Iraq) and it annoys me. I see the effects of depleted uranium and white phosphorus and it is tragic. If you spoke to the majority who dislike Israel [who hold sane conversations or are knowledgeable on foreign policy] you'd find that their concerns are not ill founded. There's the few who will always spout off nonsense about the 'Joos'... it's best to just brush them off. Regardless of rebutting their ignorance, they aren't going to listen. Hell, they probably won't even read it.

If you're looking for a way to speak to people who blindly and eternally want aid continued to Israel, speak about the issues of Israel's sovereignty being affected. Appeal to their sense of obligation of doing things for Israel's benefit. Oh, it throws them into a conundrum. "Israel ought be free to conduct their affairs as they see fit without United States foreign aid coming into play on their decisions." "We shouldn't dictate to Israel their policy." Many politicians there want the aid cut for that very reason. Israel-firsters don't quite know how to respond.

----------


## amy31416

> KC I really enjoyed reading this response and I share many of the same concerns you do about our relationship with Israel; however, how do you address the instinct of many folks in the liberty movement to always condemn Israel and ignore the behavior of other countries? (I ask you this, but I understand you can't explain the behavior of other people)
> 
> For example, if there is a story about Israel attacking a country, there is a lot of commentary and finger wagging pointed in Israel's direction...but if another country commits the same treacherous act, there is silence? I get the sense there is animosity towards Israel.


Axis of Evil: US, Israel and Saudi Arabia.

(Their governments, not necessarily their people--however their/our people do make up the government.)

Does this mean I think Iran, North Korea and Iraq are wonderful? $#@! no--but I hold us and our allies to higher standards. Should I not?

----------


## Massachusetts

> Are we getting money for this thread?  'Cause it ain't just the District of Calamity that's being sponsored by the Zionists.  If they can subsidize 90% of the televangelist channels on the airwaves, seems like they can pay this site to host _this_ paid commercial program...


This kind of proves my point.

And no I am not being paid for posting my opinion.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> This kind of proves my point.
> 
> And no I am not being paid for posting my opinion.


Understand, though, that this topic has been discussed quite a bit. There are a few who do get paid to post pro-Israel things to the internet. There's an app for it, even, that directs students, in exchange for financial benefits, to combat anything 'anti'-Israel. Most of the people who responded to you aren't normally crass. If one thinks their time is being wasted, or sophist arguments are promoted, or even that one simply is here to troll for kicks they respond differently than if asked about it in what they'd consider a genuine way (not that I think you are paid to post or anything of the sort... hell, I've never even seen you post to the forums).

I've talked to you before in chat, haven't discussed this issue in a while, your OP was worded quite respectfully and was thought out and I think this thread is/could be productive.

----------


## twomp

> For example, if there is a story about Israel attacking a country, there is a lot of commentary and finger wagging pointed in Israel's direction...but if another country commits the same treacherous act, there is silence? I get the sense there is animosity towards Israel.


Do you just make these things up out of the blue or what? What country has done the same thing as Israel and we don't discuss it? Post a topic if you are so interested in getting the discussion started. Not only do you want us to love Israel as much as you do, you want us to create new topics to discuss something other than Israel as well?

The vast majority of the news websites are PR0-Israel. You can go there if you feel like cheer leading Israel and their current murder of civilians.  I am sure you will find a VERY receptive audience over there. But that is not enough for you is it? You want everyone here to be kinder, gentler to those poor victims in Israel as well right?

----------


## enhanced_deficit

> 1) Israel is our strongest ally in the part of the world where folks are the most hostile toward the United States. ...


If that is the case, why no Israeli troops stood with American troops on frontlines in Iraq during Operation Iraqi Freedom?

How many terror attacks against America took place before and after America started funding Israeli occupation of Palestinians?

Do you believe arabs and jews are equal as races or one is more chosen than the other... in other words, do you support or oppose zionism?

Just to understand where you are coming from.

----------


## Constitutional Paulicy

> but I hold us and our allies to higher standards. Should I not?


You're right, and this is why we are so disappointed and outraged. We have been enablers. The Jewish settlers made up 8% of the total population and inherited 55% of the land under the 1947 UN plan, yet they continue to seize and occupy more and more, and we have emboldened it....

----------


## WillieKamm

> 1) Israel isn't our best ally. The benefits that the American people might theoretically gain from the relationship is negated by the fact that we are more likely to be attacked, and have been attacked, for going down this road of entangling alliances. The United States supplies Israel with weaponry that often violates conventions, said weaponry is used on Palestinians, (whether you believe justifiably so or not is a moot point) various factions in the Middle East and elsewhere point to the mangled corpses of innocent men, women, and children and sell a tale about a so-called American war on Islam. Statements made by prominent neoconservative talking heads only serves to reinforce that perception. Many are recruited, radicalized, and convinced that a life of war against the United States, and anyone happening to be from there, is moral, righteous, and their duty. These aren't soldiers who are largely paid to fight. They will keep using guerrilla tactics and attacking Americans at every opportunity. We shouldn't be there.
> 
> Not simply that, Israel would have an incentive to work towards peaceful relationships with its neighbors if the United States was not artificially propping them up.
> 
> 2) Israel has attacked us before. The people of Israel are not 'our' enemy, but the government of Israel certainly doesn't much have any qualms about committing acts of war against the United States. Israel bombs hospitals, schools, their forces shoot down innocent children, their munitions (often supplied by the United States) cause excruciating and slow deaths of many innocent people. It is not in the individuals of the United States interest to sponsor these things. Sure, a few Americans prosper greatly. A few receive oil drilling contracts, military welfare, and various other self-enriching, crony-capitalist plots and schemes are realized.
> 
> 3) It's not simply the politicians who have become utterly subservient to the will of AIPAC, it is the American people who have been taught many of the things you say. "They are our best ally in the Middle East" etc. (they aren't, and regardless, we shouldn't be there). Many's interpretation of the Bible and fanatical aspirations to promote an apocalypse signifying the Second Coming of Christ is to blame as well. They equate Israel, the modern day state, to Israel that is mentioned in the Bible. It's quite amazing that the only bills and/or resolutions that can pass with unanimous consent are the bills to give Israel more money, or reconfirm the undying, eternal, entangling relationship (or other pointless theatrics for politicians to point to on how much they supported Israel when they travel home). It's sickening.
> 
> 4) Many in Israel actively call for the aid. Many in America actively offer it. Regardless of all that, yes, they should deny it. And yes, America should not be offering it. What do they want? Sovereignty? Or to be an American puppet state? As the relationship stands, considering how much our policy is dictated by Israel, and not vise versa, I'd say "we" are the puppets.
> ...


 Excellent.

----------


## jmdrake

> KC I really enjoyed reading this response and I share many of the same concerns you do about our relationship with Israel; however, how do you address the instinct of many folks in the liberty movement to always condemn Israel and ignore the behavior of other countries? (I ask you this, but I understand you can't explain the behavior of other people)


Okay.  ^This is complete and utter crap.  Seriously it is.  I throw up a little in my mouth every time I hear the lie perpetrated by you and others that people who criticize Israel don't criticize other countries.  Hell...how many times do people in this movement criticize actions of the United States?  There are often criticisms of Mexico (a whole thread recently devoted to Mexico and Guatemala committing an "act of war" by greasing the skids of immigrants heading north), China, North Korea, Russia, you name it.  Many have been highly critical of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia for their roles in CIA sponsored wars that destabilize foreign countries.  And yet any time anyone *ever* criticizes Israel, instead of dealing with said criticism on its face, we get the "Well you're singling out Israel and not criticizing any other countries" lie from hell, and personally I'm sick and tired of it!




> For example, if there is a story about Israel attacking a country, there is a lot of commentary and finger wagging pointed in Israel's direction...but if another country commits the same treacherous act, there is silence? I get the sense there is animosity towards Israel.


Says you.  Further criticism is best aimed at people you have some possible influence over.  Next time Canada bombs or invades someone, let us know so that we can all speak out.  But pretty much everyone here spoke out when the U.S. bombed Libya or Syria.  Your argument is flat out dishonest because it ignores that.  I'm not saying you are being dishonest.  You are perhaps parroting an argument that you have heard from others.  But the argument is dishonest.

But you know what you didn't address?  This point that post you "responded" to.

*Israel has attacked us before.*

Read up on the U.S.S. Liberty and the Lavon affair.  Both are documented acts of war against the U.S. by Israel.  Had Iran done either, it would be bombed into the stone age.  What you should be asking yourselves isn't why do Israel's critics not criticize other countries.  Your question should be why do Israel's critics never criticize *Israel* and then try to paint anyone who ever does criticize Israel as "anti Jew" or "anti Israel."

----------


## jmdrake

> Axis of Evil: US, Israel and Saudi Arabia.
> 
> (Their governments, not necessarily their people--however their/our people do make up the government.)
> 
> Does this mean I think Iran, North Korea and Iraq are wonderful? $#@! no--but I hold us and our allies to higher standards. Should I not?


Amy, you criticized Saudi Arabia.  According to the OP's logic you do not exist.  Nobody exists within this movement that ever criticize Israel and some other country.  No, the only people that exist are the good patriots that criticize anyone but Israel and the racist patriots who only criticize Israel.

----------


## presence

> 1) Israel is our strongest ally





> Quoting Thomas Jefferson 21 June 2000 Ron Paul states:
> 
> Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations, entangling  alliances with none, I deem one of the essential principles of our  government and consequently one of those which ought to shape its  administration.




WE HAVE NO ALLIES WE ARE SOVERIEGN.

----------


## mczerone

> Stopped reading here. For $#@! sake. $#@! off. We are not anti-semites or do we hate Israelis.


I stopped here: 


> Israel is our strongest ally in [that] part of the world


Anyone who still uses the word "our" to refer to the US Fed Gov shouldn't be lecturing the "liberty movement."

----------


## twomp



----------


## jmdrake

I just realized the purpose of this thread.  Forgive me but I'm not on here 24/7 like I used to be and I don't bother keeping up with the news either.  I did hear about Israel's latest war with Hamas.  My reaction was "Oh well.  Here we go again."  I suppose there have been a lot of threads on this lately.  Frankly, I just don't care anymore.  Both sides are stupid.  Israel is stupid for having settlers living in areas that can't be defended.  The Palestinians are stupid for taking the bait and killing three Israeli teens.  The Israeli settlers are stupid for retaliating and killing a Palestinian teen.  The Palestinians are stupid for responding with rockets that are guaranteed to provoke a stupid response from Israel in terms of air strikes and a ground invasion.  Everybody claims victimhood in all of this.  The civilian casualties mount up.

----------


## CaptainAmerica

> I have observed many debates on foreign policy on RPF, DP, and countless other liberty-oriented sites. A trend I have noticed is the anti-Israel sentiments and the downright hatred of Israel.
> 
> Many in the liberty movement are so off on this issue for a few reasons:
> 
> 1) Israel is our strongest ally in the part of the world where folks are the most hostile toward the United States. The United States has spent a long time playing Russian Roulette with countries in the Middle East (i.e. arming ISIS in Syria, and fighting against them in Iraq)..but Israel has *almost always been our ally.
> 
> 2) The anger is directed towards Israel as if they are our enemy. You can disagree with actions that Israel takes in terms of military strategy without expressing hatred of Israel and their people.
> 
> 3) The power of the AIPAC lobby - just like liberals broadly lump in all gun owners in with the NRA, it is unfair to broadly lump all the folks in Israel with AIPAC. The anger should be dedicated towards the politicians who allow AIPAC to have such a heavy influence on their decision making when it comes to foreign policy - not Israel.
> ...


I am unsure of "anger" directed at Israel , more like a disgust people commonly feel about the double standards when it comes to foreign aid. I am a christian and I don't believe the "israeli" government is holy , it is actually the practice of mammon worship.Jacobs name is important (son of Isaac in the bible) God directly calls him "oh Jacob you worm", later on God said his name would no longer be known as Jacob but Israel would be the new name. This is prophetic word, prophetic word is simply the pointing towards and revealing of Jesus Christ existing from beginning to end of the entire bible. So what does this mean "oh Jacob you worm" and Jacob's name being Israel later on? Jacob represents the old covenant, the works of man...Israel is the bride of Jesus Christ a new creation. Israel the state exists because the practice of mammon(practice of worshipping wealth and works and race are promoted out of misunderstanding prophecy and rejecting Jesus Christ). The state of Israel is a counterfeit Israel, it is not the nation of Israel.God had seen Jesus Christ over the people since the beginning, it would not be by their own works or personality but that God had seen Jesus Christ raising the spiritually dead through Jacobs lineage and this is why his name was now Israel. I cannot and will not support a man made state of politicians that perpetuates mammon at its core.  With that said, it is an entire different but interwoven subject that would take pages worth of theology to discuss. There is a historical background to the established "state" of Israel which also troubles me. Jewish people migrated allover the slovak nations as well as europe pre ww2. Many were called Ashkenazi Jewish people, and they settled in many parts other than Jerusalem. It was not until the League of Nations stepped in and took rule away from the Ottoman Empire and Germany after ww1 that the land began having borders put up. What the United Nations did later on after ww2 in partitioning land and making it the "state of israel" is not something I want to be a part of because it only leads to blood shed on all sides of the borders.

----------


## enhanced_deficit

> 


Need to learn more about this to see if birth-ism has a direct connection to race-ism.


*Gaza fighting won't stop Birthright, but other tourists wary of visiting Israel*

*Itineraries on the free Taglit have been adjusted for security situation, but not a single participant has canceled.*

                                                                                                                                         By                                                                                                                                                                                 Rina Rozenberg                                                                                                                                       |                                                                                                              Jul. 14, 2014 | 11:00 AM                             
Meanwhile, of the some 3,200 Jews aged 18 to 26 from 10 different  countries are currently touring Israel with *Birthright* groups, not a  single participant has asked to shorten their trip on account of the  security situation, Birthright Israel said. Officials attributed this to  the instructions it has given to all participants to call their parents  every day.                                                  
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               Organizers have changed itineraries, however, to keep them away from the south and other areas considered dangerous.                                                  
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             “The  number of cancellations is much smaller than could have been expected,”  said Birthright CEO Gidi Mark, who put it at only around 5%, compared  with 3% on average overall. “Those who are here now feel it is a  once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to see how Israel really looks.”                                                  
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               A  few days ago a ship carrying 800 French youth-movement members arrived  in Israel. “The teens are happy, but we get calls from worried parents,  and there are also a few parents who said they’re coming on Sunday to  take their children home,” said Amos Hermon, CEO of the Jewish Agency’s  Israel Experience.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> For example, if there is a story about Israel attacking a country, there is a lot of commentary and finger wagging pointed in Israel's direction...but if another country commits the same treacherous act, there is silence?


The mainstream media picks the topics of discussion. If they discuss Israel once every ten minutes on every mainstream media outlet, statistically there will be more discussion of Israel, both positive and negative.

----------


## pcosmar

> *An issue many in the liberty movement get wrong* 
> 
> I welcome any criticism and/or concurrence with what I have laid out in this thread. I look forward to receiving your feedback, RPF.


I find the entire post rather insulting, of both intelligence and motivation of the members here.

----------


## Seraphim

This x1000.




> Axis of Evil: US, Israel and Saudi Arabia.
> 
> (Their governments, not necessarily their people--however their/our people do make up the government.)
> 
> Does this mean I think Iran, North Korea and Iraq are wonderful? $#@! no--but I hold us and our allies to higher standards. Should I not?

----------


## MelissaCato

I like to keep my knows in domestic policy - but, this whole Palestine and Israel mess is making me sick as does ALL killings. I've seen dozens of pictures/videos of dead children in the past week from Palestine ... parents claim it's Israel doing the killing. Then, I see pictures/video from Israel saying they ARE doing the killing !!!  WTF !!!

Sooo, I stopped reading this OP at "You can disagree with actions that Israel takes in terms of military  strategy without expressing hatred of Israel and their people."

I disagree 100%. *100% I tell ya.* 

It takes some sick POS to target an kill children *for ANY reason what so ever* .. and even sicker POS to defend that action. If you care to know what I think.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> I like to keep my knows in domestic policy - but, this whole Palestine and Israel mess is making me sick as does ALL killings. I've seen dozens of pictures/videos of dead children in the past week from Palestine ... parents claim it's Israel doing the killing. Then, I see pictures/video from Israel saying they ARE doing the killing !!!  WTF !!!
> 
> Sooo, I stopped reading this OP at "You can disagree with actions that Israel takes in terms of military  strategy without expressing hatred of Israel and their people."
> 
> I disagree 100%. *100% I tell ya.* 
> 
> It takes some sick POS to target an kill children *for ANY reason what so ever* .. and even sicker POS to defend that action. If you care to know what I think.


A video illustrating what you are talking about.

----------


## MelissaCato

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=768365246517426

----------


## MelissaCato

Thoughts ? 

http://youtu.be/iXRO1YFreNA


Make note what the lady at the end of this video says ...

Remember what Ron Paul said about Hamas (?)  Interesting huh ? 

http://youtu.be/27esxkQtfTc

----------


## 69360

Ally? What exactly do they do for us except take money and drag us into their $#@!?

----------


## pcosmar

> Ally? What exactly do they do for us except take money and drag us into their $#@!?


bribe Politicians,, own the media,, and they are profitable to Military contractors.

----------


## Massachusetts

> Do you just make these things up out of the blue or what? What country has done the same thing as Israel and we don't discuss it? Post a topic if you are so interested in getting the discussion started. Not only do you want us to love Israel as much as you do, you want us to create new topics to discuss something other than Israel as well?
> 
> The vast majority of the news websites are PR0-Israel. You can go there if you feel like cheer leading Israel and their current murder of civilians.  I am sure you will find a VERY receptive audience over there. But that is not enough for you is it? You want everyone here to be kinder, gentler to those poor victims in Israel as well right?


A) I was not referring specifically to this site - it is just a trend I noticed in some liberty circles. Trust me, I am not Mr. Israel cheerleader myself. In fact, I read a very interesting book on the Israel Lobby, which can be found here. I just wanted to inject an alternative viewpoint (this thread) to the dialogue.

B) As for other countries that kill innocent people...well let's say the list is pretty extensive. Perhaps the reason Israel gets so much attention is their high profile.




> If that is the case, why no Israeli troops stood with American troops on frontlines in Iraq during Operation Iraqi Freedom?
> 
> How many terror attacks against America took place before and after America started funding Israeli occupation of Palestinians?
> 
> Do you believe arabs and jews are equal as races or one is more chosen than the other... in other words, do you support or oppose zionism?
> 
> Just to understand where you are coming from.


A) I don't know - I'm not aware of the facts surrounding that. Is this true? If so, it is very disappointing. Although, I am not in favor of either Iraq war to begin with...to be fair.
B)  Well, as I understand it, America started giving Israel foreign aid in 1985. I don't think we should give any country foreign aid FYI.
C) No...all races are equal and I do not support zionism.




> You're right, and this is why we are so disappointed and outraged. We have been enablers. The Jewish settlers made up 8% of the total population and inherited 55% of the land under the 1947 UN plan, yet they continue to seize and occupy more and more, and we have emboldened it....


I don't support U.S. foreign aid emboldening Israel either.




> Okay.  ^This is complete and utter crap.  Seriously it is.  I throw up a little in my mouth every time I hear the lie perpetrated by you and others that people who criticize Israel don't criticize other countries.  Hell...how many times do people in this movement criticize actions of the United States?  There are often criticisms of Mexico (a whole thread recently devoted to Mexico and Guatemala committing an "act of war" by greasing the skids of immigrants heading north), China, North Korea, Russia, you name it.  Many have been highly critical of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia for their roles in CIA sponsored wars that destabilize foreign countries.  And yet any time anyone *ever* criticizes Israel, instead of dealing with said criticism on its face, we get the "Well you're singling out Israel and not criticizing any other countries" lie from hell, and personally I'm sick and tired of it!


I  wasn't referring to criticism of the U.S. per-say. I'm well-aware of the criticism aimed at the U.S. gov't. I have been one of those critics as well. It just strikes me as odd that there is never as much outrage about the acts of terrorist organizations such as Hamas. It's almost as if it is shrugged off and written off as blowback - as if their acts of terrorism are justified. I believe there is a delicate balance of blowback and plain radicalism. Yeah, there is blowback, but there are also sick people out there who want to kill infidels. I get the sense that many folks write off that behavior because of the blowback argument - it isn't 100% blowback. Even Ron Paul acknowledged this in a debate when he said "Reagan was right. We don't understand the irrationality of Middle East politics." This fact strengthens the argument that we should bring our troops home.




> Says you.  Further criticism is best aimed at people you have some possible influence over.  Next time Canada bombs or invades someone, let us know so that we can all speak out.  But pretty much everyone here spoke out when the U.S. bombed Libya or Syria.  Your argument is flat out dishonest because it ignores that.  I'm not saying you are being dishonest.  You are perhaps parroting an argument that you have heard from others.  But the argument is dishonest.


As I mentioned before, I wasn't referring to the U.S. per-say. I refer back to my point about terrorist organizations such as Hamas.




> But you know what you didn't address?  This point that post you "responded" to.
> 
> *Israel has attacked us before.*
> 
> Read up on the U.S.S. Liberty and the Lavon affair.  Both are documented acts of war against the U.S. by Israel.  Had Iran done either, it would be bombed into the stone age.  What you should be asking yourselves isn't why do Israel's critics not criticize other countries.  Your question should be why do Israel's critics never criticize *Israel* and then try to paint anyone who ever does criticize Israel as "anti Jew" or "anti Israel."


I will read up on the U.S.S Liberty and the Lavon affair. I can't say you're wrong, so I won't disagree.




> Amy, you criticized Saudi Arabia.  According to the OP's logic you do not exist.  Nobody exists within this movement that ever criticize Israel and some other country.  No, the only people that exist are the good patriots that criticize anyone but Israel and the racist patriots who only criticize Israel.


I never said anybody is racist - that is a flat out lie.




> WE HAVE NO ALLIES WE ARE SOVERIEGN.


I don't think we should have permanent allies - but I think even George Washington made it clear, sometimes you need temporary alliances during an emergency or time of war. We should bring the troops home - but in the end the word ally is just a matter of semantics. The context I was using the word in was used to describe friendship - something non-interventionists have always been in favor of.




> I stopped here: 
> 
> Anyone who still uses the word "our" to refer to the US Fed Gov shouldn't be lecturing the "liberty movement."


I'm not lecturing the liberty movement - simply referring to a wrinkle in the liberty movement. Sometimes it's good to look in the mirror, reflect, and self-critique. Not many folks are willing to come out and say they believe in preserving our friendship with Israel and utilizing it when needed. Sometimes it's nice to hear the other side and not just parrot the same talking points over and over - preaching to the choir is not healthy.

And I love my country - just because I love my country doesn't mean I am also by default in love with my government.




> I just realized the purpose of this thread.  Forgive me but I'm not on here 24/7 like I used to be and I don't bother keeping up with the news either.  I did hear about Israel's latest war with Hamas.  My reaction was "Oh well.  Here we go again."  I suppose there have been a lot of threads on this lately.  Frankly, I just don't care anymore.  Both sides are stupid.  Israel is stupid for having settlers living in areas that can't be defended.  The Palestinians are stupid for taking the bait and killing three Israeli teens.  The Israeli settlers are stupid for retaliating and killing a Palestinian teen.  The Palestinians are stupid for responding with rockets that are guaranteed to provoke a stupid response from Israel in terms of air strikes and a ground invasion.  Everybody claims victimhood in all of this.  The civilian casualties mount up.


Both sides have committed cruel acts against the other.




> I am unsure of "anger" directed at Israel , more like a disgust people commonly feel about the double standards when it comes to foreign aid. I am a christian and I don't believe the "israeli" government is holy , it is actually the practice of mammon worship.Jacobs name is important (son of Isaac in the bible) God directly calls him "oh Jacob you worm", later on God said his name would no longer be known as Jacob but Israel would be the new name. This is prophetic word, prophetic word is simply the pointing towards and revealing of Jesus Christ existing from beginning to end of the entire bible. So what does this mean "oh Jacob you worm" and Jacob's name being Israel later on? Jacob represents the old covenant, the works of man...Israel is the bride of Jesus Christ a new creation. Israel the state exists because the practice of mammon(practice of worshipping wealth and works and race are promoted out of misunderstanding prophecy and rejecting Jesus Christ). The state of Israel is a counterfeit Israel, it is not the nation of Israel.God had seen Jesus Christ over the people since the beginning, it would not be by their own works or personality but that God had seen Jesus Christ raising the spiritually dead through Jacobs lineage and this is why his name was now Israel. I cannot and will not support a man made state of politicians that perpetuates mammon at its core.  With that said, it is an entire different but interwoven subject that would take pages worth of theology to discuss. There is a historical background to the established "state" of Israel which also troubles me. Jewish people migrated allover the slovak nations as well as europe pre ww2. Many were called Ashkenazi Jewish people, and they settled in many parts other than Jerusalem. It was not until the League of Nations stepped in and took rule away from the Ottoman Empire and Germany after ww1 that the land began having borders put up. What the United Nations did later on after ww2 in partitioning land and making it the "state of israel" is not something I want to be a part of because it only leads to blood shed on all sides of the borders.


I did not intend to turn this argument into a theological argument. I am not coming at this from that angle at all.




> I find the entire post rather insulting, of both intelligence and motivation of the members here.


That is your opinion. The post is not insulting whatsoever and was never intended to be. It was merely intended to add an alternate point of view to the general Israel discussion.




> Ally? What exactly do they do for us except take money and drag us into their $#@!?


As I mentioned previously, I am in favor of ending all foreign aid - including to Israel. And I wouldn't exactly say they "drag us into their $#@!". Could you point to an example? We provide them financing, weapons, training and use of our military bases..although I will admit, I am not aware of the intricate details of our "alliance". Perhaps you could enlighten me.

Other than Iran rhetoric, embargoes, etc. Perhaps I am just uneducated on the subject, but when have we gotten directly involved in an Israeli conflict? Troops on the ground?

----------


## pcosmar

> A) 
> 
> Other than Iran rhetoric, embargoes, etc. Perhaps I am just uneducated on the subject, but when have we gotten directly involved in an Israeli conflict? Troops on the ground?


We have been directly involved since the creation of Israel.
We were involved in their creation and have been directly involved in their defense. We have supplied them with arms and $$$.
And are suspected in supplying their nukes. (against the non proliferation agreements)

We have officially supported Zionism since 1922.
http://www.justicenow4israel.com/lodge-fish.html

----------


## Acala

I care no more for Israel than any other socialist police state.  And that ain't much.  On the other hand, I have an equal concern for suffering humanity all over the globe.  But it isn't my government's job to force me to intervene.

----------


## HOLLYWOOD

9/11 turned America into a Nazi-Stasi $#@!hole... Washington DC torn up the US Constitution... Let's reflect on WHY IT HAPPEN and WHO IS RESPONSIBLE

----------


## Tod

I saw this video posted by someone under the headline, "The Most Important Video About Israel Ever Made", and watched it.




And then I did a search on "middle east before 1948" and among the returns was this page:  http://dlhak.wordpress.com/.../a-history-lesson-for.../ which includes images from old books, including a color map from a 1921 book:

http://dlhak.files.wordpress.com/201...920-2-0022.jpg  <=== for some reason this pic won't display correctly, so here is a link to it instead.

As  nearly as I can determine, from the video above and the link in this  comment, the United Nations voted to create the modern state of Israel  without the consent of the people who actually lived there (in 1921  Palestine was a sub-area of  "Arabia") and the people who actually lived  there have been fighting it ever since. [which is perfectly understandable; who is the United Nations to tell someone that they have to give up their land to make a new country for someone else?]

Does this sound right?

----------


## Tod

anyone know how to make the above color map a smaller size?

----------


## Bman

What purpose does a thread like this serve?  There's always going to be a vocal minority that yells and screams or doesn't like something.  Why give them attention if they single out a single entity.  While somethings don't go away if you ignore them they'll at least find a different crowd that may be receptive to their hate.  Better the other crowd than this one.

----------


## Tod

Here is the most in-depth discussion I've come across so far (for some reason it won't embed for me):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9Q_8ZrYku4

----------


## alucard13mm

Can we at least agree that as an American: USA comes first, Israel/Allies comes second, everyone else good luck.

----------


## 69360

> As I mentioned previously, I am in favor of ending all foreign aid - including to Israel. And I wouldn't exactly say they "drag us into their $#@!". Could you point to an example? We provide them financing, weapons, training and use of our military bases..although I will admit, I am not aware of the intricate details of our "alliance". Perhaps you could enlighten me.
> 
> Other than Iran rhetoric, embargoes, etc. Perhaps I am just uneducated on the subject, but when have we gotten directly involved in an Israeli conflict? Troops on the ground?


You have got to be kidding or deliberately trolling. The stated goal of AQ, Hamas, Fatah, the government of Iran etc and so on is to remove the Israeli regime and give the Palestinians a country. Our support of the Israeli regime has caused the Iranian hostage crisis, 9/11 and the war in Afghanistan and all sorts of other conflicts in the middle east.

----------


## Acala

> You have got to be kidding or deliberately trolling. The stated goal of AQ, Hamas, Fatah, the government of Iran etc and so on is to remove the Israeli regime and give the Palestinians a country. Our support of the Israeli regime has caused the Iranian hostage crisis, 9/11 and the war in Afghanistan and all sorts of other conflicts in the middle east.


The Iranian hostage crisis was a direct result of the US staging a coup to overthrow a freely elected, secular president in Iran and installing a brutal dictator.  And we did that because that freely elected President was renegotiating oil contracts with the predecessor of British Petroleum and BP didn't like it.  So, no, the hostage crisis was not about Israel, it was about oil and corporate profits.

----------


## Acala

> You have got to be kidding or deliberately trolling. The stated goal of AQ, Hamas, Fatah, the government of Iran etc and so on is to remove the Israeli regime and give the Palestinians a country. Our support of the Israeli regime has caused the Iranian hostage crisis, 9/11 and the war in Afghanistan and all sorts of other conflicts in the middle east.


Furthermore, although our support of Israel was part of the motivation for 9/11, it certainly wasn't ALL of it.  It was also a result of our occupation of Saudi Arabia and support for the corrupt government there and our intervention in Bosnia.

As for the war in Afghanistan, that was pretty much ALL blowback from our intervention in the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.  Specifically, our organization, training, and equiping of the Taliban and Al Quaida.

So I think your indictment is not well-founded.

But we still have no business taking sides or being involved in any way in the Middle East.  Not with dollars, not with soldiers, not with weapons, not with covert ops, not with intelligence, not with diplomacy, not even with stupid Congressional Resolutions.

----------


## pcosmar

> Our support of the Israeli regime has caused the Iranian hostage crisis,


*NO it did not.*

The overthrow if the elected and well loved leader of Iran by the CIA in 1953,, and the propping up of the Puppet Shaw.. The Creation and support of Savak (secret police) led to the Revolution in Iran.. The hostages were to prevent the CIA and US gov from reinstating the Shaw.

This is documented History.

----------


## 69360

Shah or no Shah there were always Islamic radicals existing in Iran. They did not want the state of Israel to exist and didn't want Prime minister Mossadegh either, they wanted an Islamic state. The created nation of Israel is at the root of probably 80% of the problems in the middle east. Since it's creation by the US and Britain post WW2, most of the Mideast misadventures have involved defending against those who detest it's existence. Was it really worth it?

----------


## pcosmar

> Shah or no Shah there were always Islamic radicals existing in Iran. They did not want the state of Israel to exist and didn't want Prime minister Mossadegh either, they wanted an Islamic state. *The created nation of Israel is at the root of probably 80% of the problems in the middle east.* Since it's creation by the US and Britain post WW2, most of the Mideast misadventures have involved defending against those who detest it's existence. Was it really worth it?


It is my firm belief that Israel was created to cause problems in the MidEast..  It is it's sole purpose of existence.




> "The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the "agentur" of the "Illuminati" between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other. Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustionWe shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil. Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view. This manifestation will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time."


that quote from Lucifarian sources coincides with predictions in the Bible..
That area of the world will be the location of the final confrontation between Lucifer and Christ..

Ground zero will be Jerusalem.. where the Anti-christ (Lucifer) will have his throne.

The first world war gave us the League of Nations..
The second world war gave us the United Nations

The third world war will bring a One World Government (NWO) 
Israel was created by people that instigated both the first and second world wars. It was created to incite the third world war.

----------


## dannno

I don't like Israel because their excuse to exist there is that they are descendants of German concentration camp survivors and yet they themselves also run a couple concentration camps.

Ron Paul refers to Gaza Strip as a concentration camp:

----------


## osan

> I have observed many debates on foreign policy on RPF, DP, and countless other liberty-oriented sites. *A trend* I have noticed is the anti-Israel sentiments and the downright hatred of Israel.


One can find almost any "trend" in any population, if chosen carefully.  Your statement is essentially meaningless as it lacks even the least sufficient specificity as regards the character of the trend in vague-question or to which population in definite detail it refers.  "Liberty movement" means next to nothing.




> 1) Israel is our *strongest* ally in the part of the world where folks are the most hostile toward the United States. The United States has spent a long time playing Russian Roulette with countries in the Middle East (i.e. arming ISIS in Syria, and fighting against them in Iraq)..but Israel has *almost always been our ally.


That they are our strongest ally (questionable, but I will grant it here for generosity's sake), it does not follow they are a GOOD ally.  The fact that ca. '82-'83 (later maybe???) we caught them with their pants at their ankles spying on us would seem to indicate that they are not a particularly good ally.  I have nothing against Israelis in general.  My statements are simply observations of fact and what I believe to be the reasonable and rational inferences to make based on them.




> 2) The anger is directed towards Israel as if they are our enemy. You can disagree with actions that Israel takes in terms of military strategy without expressing hatred of Israel and their people.


And if people do not, that is their business and not yours.  Different people will hold to differing fundamental assumptions regarding that which constitutes a good ally v. a bad.  If you have a point to make, you really do need to work on your delivery because as of this point this is nothing better than a rant devoid of any import or credibility.  You are entitled to your opinion, but you have yet to convince anyone outside of your own choir of the merits of it.




> 3) The power of the AIPAC lobby - just like liberals broadly lump in all gun owners in with the NRA, it is unfair to broadly lump all the folks in Israel with AIPAC. The anger should be dedicated towards the politicians who allow AIPAC to have such a heavy influence on their decision making when it comes to foreign policy - not Israel.


Unsupported accusations are rank stoogery.  For pity's sake, could you not at least make a token effort to appear sincere.  This is nonsense.




> 4) The foreign aid the United States sends to Israel isn't Israel's fault.


More stoogery.  How do you know this to be true?  Are you privy to all the internals of the US-Israeli relationship?  If not, then I would suggest you have zero basis for being regarded as credible.




> The anger here should be directed towards our politicians who try to buy influence with foreign leaders using foreign aid as a tool to do so.


Finally you write something passably credible.




> In conclusion, the anger directed towards Israel for many controversial topics should be directed elsewhere. You can be critical of Israel for specific actions they take, just as you would be critical of the United States for specific actions they take. It is just this guy's opinion that it is absurd to oppose everything that Israel, an ally of the United States, does. It is a subject that I think is a sore spot in the liberty movement that should be addressed moving forward. Just my take.


You assert "an ally" as if it meant something.  FAIL.  The Israelis, so far as I can tell, are a mix of good and crap... pretty well like most other self-identifying groups.  Nothing special there.  They do plenty bad, but of course they are not the only guilt parties in this affair.  The Palestinians are equally to blame IMO.  There is more than enough guilt to spread around in that region.  And just for your general information, the very existence of "Israel" came about in eminently questionable fashion.  All the standard arguments for the justification of its establishment are pure FAIL and have been discussed in these forums many times, so do a little research on the site and I am sure you will be able to hit pay dirt.  Now they are here - they are fact - what does one do about that, drive them into the sea?  I say no, but their treatment of the indigenous people has been atrocious.  Now the Palestinians are hip-deep in the cycle of endless violence.  I say screw them both.  I wish them nothing bad, but I am also not terribly interested in aiding and abetting either side.  So far as I am concerned, the choice is theirs to live in piece or kill each other to the man.  I do not see the world as being any the poorer for their absence if war is what they insist upon.  The strife in the middle-east is SO yesterday.  I cannot imagine anything as boring as these people - not even Obama.

----------


## twomp

> B) As for other countries that kill innocent people...well let's say the list is pretty extensive. Perhaps the reason Israel gets so much attention is their high profile.


Again you make that statement without any examples. It is coming off like you are just shilling for Israel. Which country has killed more of its neighbors than Israel. How many Palestinians have the Israeli killed and you never hear about it? Yet, just 1 Israeli citizen dies and everyone in our country knows about it. TERRORISM you see. 

The media coverage of the deaths of Palestinians and the death of Israelis isn't even comparable and yet here you are, saying ridiculous stuff like this as if there were more Israeli victims than Palestinian victims. I don't know the exact number but I am willing to bet that for every 1 Israeli that dies at the hands of Palestinian, there are 10 Palestinians that die at the hands of the Israelis. 10 to 1. Would you be willing to take that bet with me?

----------


## HOLLYWOOD

> I don't like Israel because their excuse to exist there is that they are descendants of German concentration camp survivors and yet they themselves also run a couple concentration camps.
> 
> Ron Paul refers to Gaza Strip as a concentration camp:


Before I start... here's the latest news:

*Israel Supporters Defend Gunboat Slaughtering of Four Boys Playing Football on a Beach
"Israel is under attack and fighting back!"*



I'll wait for the laughable propaganda garbage on FOX NEWS(et al) to come shortly to American airwaves.

__________________________________________________  _______________________________________________
*UK's Tony Blair sister-in-law: Gaza world’s largest concentration camp*

Not only Israel but,  the puppet government of Egypt. USAID buys/controls oppression everyday of the year, as well as CIA budgeted/operations in countries across the planet. New Egyptian puppet Generalissimo Al-Sisi, is a longtime groomed project by the CIA/Mi6, as well as were the Egyptian coup(s). Where's *Abdel Fattah Saeed Hussein Khalil* now? President of Egypt.
*
George Galloway & Lauren Booth: Concentration Camp Gaza


*

----------


## libertyjam

Old lady arrives home finds Jewish settlers have stolen her house

-The description under the you tube video-
The Israelis have the right to take any non-jews land as soon as they leave it.

Twenty settlers ( with sleeping bags), accompanied by private armed security and backed by Israeli police forces, entered an extension of the Palestinian house, and started clearing it of the familys belongings.

One Palestinian resident, Khamis al-Gawi, has been arrested shortly after the settlers arrived, and is still being held at a local police station. Two international activists, American and Swedish nationals, who were filming the settlers taking over the house were also arrested by the police and their video cameras confiscated.

----------


## twomp

> Old lady arrives home finds Jewish settlers have stolen her house
> 
> -The description under the you tube video-
> The Israelis have the right to take any non-jews land as soon as they leave it.
> 
> Twenty settlers ( with sleeping bags), accompanied by private armed security and backed by Israeli police forces, entered an extension of the Palestinian house, and started clearing it of the familys belongings.
> 
> One Palestinian resident, Khamis al-Gawi, has been arrested shortly after the settlers arrived, and is still being held at a local police station. Two international activists, American and Swedish nationals, who were filming the settlers taking over the house were also arrested by the police and their video cameras confiscated.


The real victim here are the Israelis. Do you know how much money they had to spend to blow up all those houses? Poor Israelis. 

Is that better OP?

----------


## donnay

> bribe *and blackmail* Politicians,, own the media,, and they are profitable to Military contractors.


FIFY

----------


## HOLLYWOOD

> anyone know how to make the above color map a smaller size?


Grab any article or picture on the internet... resize, link, etc... http://kwout.com/

----------


## HOLLYWOOD

> The real victim here are the Israelis. Do you know how much money they had to spend to blow up all those houses? Poor Israelis. 
> 
> Is that better OP?


Don't you mean, US Taxpayers that fund all this theft and terror? Who's US government vetoes every single U.N. charge, sanction, and crime, holding Israel responsible for crimes against humanity? 

BTW, The WIKILEAKS release of the 'Kissinger Cables' from the early 1970s, direct from the classified US embassy cables, proved the Israel government has no intention of letting any race or government stop their land grab from Palestinians and the final solution, which is to take all lands in  the Levant a far east to the Euphrates/Gulf. 

There's even mentioning of the removing all other religious symbols from the lands, in their "Judaification" of Israel. Those aren't by word or media, that's in the classified US Tel Aviv Embassy cables to Washington DC US State Department HQ. I also recall in the Kissinger cables of destroying and building over a Greek orthodox church. So it's not just Palestinians/Arabs but the extermination of all other Semites/icons/villages not approved by the operation Knesset. 

That shows you the facts and operations of an apartheid state run by sociopathic racists...

----------


## DFF

Massachusetts, many in the Liberty movement aren't "off" regarding Israel; they're just the opposite, hence why you started this pro-Israel propaganda thread.

----------


## MichaelDavis

> Stopped reading here. For $#@! sake. $#@! off. We are not anti-semites or do we hate Israelis.


Then you should stop acting like it.

----------


## DFF

Well, I can't speak for green73, but I can't stand Israel and I'm unapologetic about it...to me, given all the harm that it's caused in the Middle East and to the US, Israel is like the ring of Sauron...or the Beast in Revelations that deceives the whole world. 

No hyperbole, it's truly this wicked and troublesome.

----------


## bunklocoempire

> I don't like Israel because their excuse to exist there is that they are descendants of German concentration camp survivors and yet they themselves also run a couple concentration camps.
> 
> Ron Paul refers to Gaza Strip as a concentration camp:


Ron who?  Oh yeah, the website forums guy...




> http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/p.../18/id/324168/
> 
> Representative Ron Paul says House Speaker Nancy Pelosi removed a section from a bill passed by Congress which would have barred the U.S. from going to war with Iran without a congressional vote, claiming she did so at the behest of the leadership of Israel and AIPAC.
> 
> ...  
> 
> She [Pelosi] removed it deliberately, Paul says. And then, the astounding thing is, when asked why, she said the leadership in Israel asked her to. That was in the newspaper, that was in 'The Washington Post,' that she was asked by AIPAC and others not to do that."


The government of Israel and all their baggage (AIPAC) is a bad influence.   Check out AIPAC and spying for Israel.  Ally my eye.

----------


## MichaelDavis

> You're right, and this is why we are so disappointed and outraged. We have been enablers. The Jewish settlers made up 8% of the total population and inherited 55% of the land under the 1947 UN plan, yet they continue to seize and occupy more and more, and we have emboldened it....


Stop spreading lies.

----------


## Number19

It's been a while since I posted here - nothing's changed. But I chose this thread to interject a thought which I haven't seen discussed. 

It's a given that, as policy, the U.S. should follow a foreign policy of non-interventionism. But it's also commonly commented upon that our interference in the middle-east is the reason behind the anti-Americanism and the hostility held by Muslim extremists toward the U.S.; and if we would only stop intervening, then this anomosity would gradually dissipate.

But is this an accurate assessment?

If you are truly libertarian, then you believe in free trade. And American arms manufacturers would have the freedom to deal with Israel. Or would you use the force of government to prohibit this commerce?

And if Americans, as individuals, continued to support Israel, would the terrorism, or the potential for terrorism, against Americans slacken? And what would be your response if we were attacked on American soil? Of course, we could continue to tighten our border security to insure that such an attack didn't occur, but at what cost to our nation?

Would a policy of non-interventionism by our government actually improve our relations with middle-eastern culture?

I support Israel because I see them as a party that would accept a peace. I do not believe Muslim extremists would ever do so. And I do not see any movement in the general population to resist or reform this extremist political position.

I do not support our government allying our nation with Israel, but as an individual I support Israel for the reasons stated.

----------


## Christian Liberty

> If that is the case, why no Israeli troops stood with American troops on frontlines in Iraq during Operation Iraqi Freedom?
> 
> How many terror attacks against America took place before and after America started funding Israeli occupation of Palestinians?
> 
> Do you believe arabs and jews are equal as races or one is more chosen than the other... in other words, do you support or oppose zionism?
> 
> Just to understand where you are coming from.


I'm mostly indifferent to Israel as such, but why in the world should any ally of ours have gone into an aggressive war with us?  I don't believe in entangling alliances, but still.

----------


## Tywysog Cymru

I was once an Israel supporter, but I can no longer say that I am.  I cannot support a government that denies basic rights to it's inhabitants.  It's just like South Africa pre-1994.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> It's been a while since I posted here - nothing's changed. But I chose this thread to interject a thought which I haven't seen discussed. 
> 
> It's a given that, as policy, the U.S. should follow a foreign policy of non-interventionism. But it's also commonly commented upon that our interference in the middle-east is the reason behind the anti-Americanism and the hostility held by Muslim extremists toward the U.S.; and if we would only stop intervening, then this anomosity would gradually dissipate.
> 
> But is this an accurate assessment?
> 
> If you are truly libertarian, then you believe in free trade. And American arms manufacturers would have the freedom to deal with Israel. Or would you use the force of government to prohibit this commerce?
> 
> And if Americans, as individuals, continued to support Israel, would the terrorism, or the potential for terrorism, against Americans slacken? And what would be your response if we were attacked on American soil? Of course, we could continue to tighten our border security to insure that such an attack didn't occur, but at what cost to our nation?
> ...


Most people wouldn't simply call a truce if their family were murdered. Our support of Israel, as well as many other foolish policies in the Middle East and the North/East of Africa incites many and actually plays into the hands of Jihadist recruiters.

The CIA meddling, their training of the Mujahideen, their training "Afghans" (these people traveled from everywhere and eventually, largely, dispersed) in the art of bomb making, counter intelligence, etc. the radicalized text books and propaganda afforded through US tax dollars. These issues aren't going to go away. Regardless of whether or not the United States comes home today. You kick hornet's nest all year long, what outcome was ever expected?

And I'm rather short in this response but could reply more in depth if you wanted. _The Sorrows of Empire_ by Chalmers Johnson comes to mind. William Blum has had a few on the matter.

----------


## 69360

> It's been a while since I posted here - nothing's changed. But I chose this thread to interject a thought which I haven't seen discussed. 
> 
> It's a given that, as policy, the U.S. should follow a foreign policy of non-interventionism. But it's also commonly commented upon that our interference in the middle-east is the reason behind the anti-Americanism and the hostility held by Muslim extremists toward the U.S.; and if we would only stop intervening, then this anomosity would gradually dissipate.
> 
> But is this an accurate assessment?
> 
> If you are truly libertarian, then you believe in free trade. And American arms manufacturers would have the freedom to deal with Israel. Or would you use the force of government to prohibit this commerce?
> 
> And if Americans, as individuals, continued to support Israel, would the terrorism, or the potential for terrorism, against Americans slacken? And what would be your response if we were attacked on American soil? Of course, we could continue to tighten our border security to insure that such an attack didn't occur, but at what cost to our nation?
> ...


That's crap. Did Americans want to go after Boeing because their planes hit the towers? Does anyone want to go after Russians because they make AK47's? It's also crap because the percentage of Americans who would donate their own money to Israel is miniscule. Maybe .00000001%

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> That's crap. Did Americans want to go after Boeing because their planes hit the towers? Does anyone want to go after Russians because they make AK47's? It's also crap because the percentage of Americans who would donate their own money to Israel is miniscule. Maybe .00000001%


There is a greater percentage that donate now.

Stands to reason that if foreign aid were cut, more people would wish to donate.

----------


## pcosmar

> Stands to reason that if foreign aid were cut, more people would wish to donate.


"There's a sucker born every minute"

Some would..

----------


## Number19

> Most people wouldn't simply call a truce if their family were murdered. Our support of Israel, as well as many other foolish policies in the Middle East and the North/East of Africa incites many and actually plays into the hands of Jihadist recruiters.
> 
> The CIA meddling, their training of the Mujahideen, their training "Afghans" (these people traveled from everywhere and eventually, largely, dispersed) in the art of bomb making, counter intelligence, etc. the radicalized text books and propaganda afforded through US tax dollars. These issues aren't going to go away. Regardless of whether or not the United States comes home today. You kick hornet's nest all year long, what outcome was ever expected?
> 
> And I'm rather short in this response but could reply more in depth if you wanted. _The Sorrows of Empire_ by Chalmers Johnson comes to mind. William Blum has had a few on the matter.


Basically you're saying blood feuds never end, or at best, resolution takes a very, very long time. At 66 years of age, I've learned that what's important are practical solutions to bring an end to the conflict. I see none of that discussed on this forum.

On thread topic, I see attempts by Israel, but no effort on the part of Muslim extremists. I do see some success for the West Bank, but this is being undermined by extremists; and of course, by the history, and the lessons learned, of Gaza.

For my part, I'd take a political position of neutrality and respond with force when called for. This could get dicey, if the Israelis were ever forced into a position where they would have to use their nukes.  And it may come to that.

----------


## pcosmar

I oppose socialism,, and do not care to support it in any way..

I also am disgusted by nationalism..

National Socialism is the worst political system/philosophy that has ever inflicted the planet.

Why this country continues to support Nazis puzzles me. 

I do not support and adamantly oppose Zionism. It is National Socialism (NAZI)..
We are supporting a Nazi Regime in Ukraine too.

I don't understand it.
I do not support it.

----------


## TheTexan

> Israel is our strongest ally in the part of the world where folks are the most hostile toward the United States.


Israel is an apartheid state with unbounded racism and hate towards the Palestinians.  Israel was formed by aggressively forcing the Palestinians out of their land and murdering anybody who got in their way.  Our continued support of them and their behavior is a large part of why that region hates us.  (That, and we drop bombs on them, which also doesn't help)

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> Basically you're saying blood feuds never end, or at best, resolution takes a very, very long time. At 66 years of age, I've learned that what's important are practical solutions to bring an end to the conflict. I see none of that discussed on this forum.
> 
> On thread topic, I see attempts by Israel, but no effort on the part of Muslim extremists. I do see some success for the West Bank, but this is being undermined by extremists; and of course, by the history, and the lessons learned, of Gaza.
> 
> For my part, I'd take a political position of neutrality and respond with force when called for. This could get dicey, if the Israelis were ever forced into a position where they would have to use their nukes.  And it may come to that.


Send the war criminals over as peace offerings after tried in competent courts. Reestablish a committal to non-interventionism, apologize for the atrocities that have occurred.

No sure thing, mind you. It's been going on quite a while. Our [hopeful] sincerity would probably be mocked and laughed at.

----------


## acptulsa

> Basically you're saying blood feuds never end, or at best, resolution takes a very, very long time. At 66 years of age, I've learned that what's important are practical solutions to bring an end to the conflict. I see none of that discussed on this forum.


1947 was a long time ago.

The first step neither you nor a significant portion of the American population would be happy about.  The second step would be to let time heal the wounds.  And considering how actively we have been wounding the entire Middle East since WWII,  I doubt that healing would take place overnight.  Again, assuming the American populace would even allow the nation to take the first step after over sixty years of propaganda and butchered Bible verses indicating that the wrong thing to do is the right thing to do...

----------


## Number19

> Send the war criminals over as peace offerings after tried in competent courts. Reestablish a committal to non-interventionism, apologize for the atrocities that have occurred.
> 
> No sure thing, mind you. It's been going on quite a while. Our [hopeful] sincerity would probably be mocked and laughed at.


All obvious actions which would be reasonable. What about U.N. votes? Or do we pull out of the U.N.? If we pull out of the U.N., Russia may take our place - Putin has already said that Israel has the right of all nations to defend itself from attack.

If we go the route of political neutrality, do we still participate in the dialog to resolve the conflict in the middle-east? Or do we take a hardline politically, isolationist stance? Someone must arbitrate between the factions. Are we to take part in this? 

What options are feasible that advances peace?

----------


## Number19

> 1947 was a long time ago.
> 
> The first step neither you nor a significant portion of the American population would be happy about.  The second step would be to let time heal the wounds.  And considering how actively we have been wounding the entire Middle East since WWII,  I doubt that healing would take place overnight.  Again, assuming the American populace would even allow the nation to take the first step after over sixty years of propaganda and butchered Bible verses indicating that the wrong thing to do is the right thing to do...


But you don't say what that first step would be that you are so certain I would not be happy with.

----------


## TheTexan

> Stop spreading lies.


That's the dumbest thing I've ever seen.  

Picture #1: The Brits were occupiers but the land wasn't British.  Unless of course you would consider Iraqis to be American during the US occupation of Iraq.
Picture #2: Of course they rejected the plan.  This was their home, their land.  Just because foreigners had "a plan" for *their* homes doesn't mean they should give it up.
Picture #3: This is about half true, but none of it really helps your case.  For example Egypt before 1959 was largely aiding the All-Palestine Government in fighting back Israeli incursions.
Picture #4: This is just pure ignorance.  Palestinians live under constant oppression, military incursions, severely restricted movement, and blockades.  Any concept you have of Palestinian self-governance here is a farce.  The only thing coming close to self-governance is Hamas in Gaza, which is obviously not Israel-approved.

----------


## twomp

> Basically you're saying blood feuds never end, or at best, resolution takes a very, very long time. At 66 years of age, I've learned that what's important are practical solutions to bring an end to the conflict. I see none of that discussed on this forum.
> 
> On thread topic, I see attempts by Israel, but no effort on the part of Muslim extremists. I do see some success for the West Bank, but this is being undermined by extremists; and of course, by the history, and the lessons learned, of Gaza.
> 
> For my part, I'd take a political position of neutrality and respond with force when called for. This could get dicey, if the Israelis were ever forced into a position where they would have to use their nukes.  And it may come to that.


This is what happens after 66 years of Israeli/AIPAC indoctrination. There are two sides to every story and you have gotten all your facts from one side only. You sound like Dianne Sawyer and the rest of MSM news anchors crying about the pain and devastation that the Israeli have to go through while totally neglecting the Palestinian civilians who are going through FAR worse than the Israeli citizens.

There is a bully and a victim. You are siding with the bully.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> All obvious actions which would be reasonable. What about U.N. votes? Or do we pull out of the U.N.? If we pull out of the U.N., Russia may take our place - Putin has already said that Israel has the right of all nations to defend itself from attack.
> 
> If we go the route of political neutrality, do we still participate in the dialog to resolve the conflict in the middle-east? Or do we take a hardline politically, isolationist stance? Someone must arbitrate between the factions. Are we to take part in this? 
> 
> What options are feasible that advances peace?


Yes. We are to pull out of the UN.

No, I am not concerned about Russia. The 1000% or so yearly spent more than the Russians ought provide legitimate self-defense needs.

"Isolationist" in the manner you've used it is derogatory. The people dropping bombs, promoting protectionist policies, sanctioning countries, meddling: They promote isolationist stances. Not I.

The founders were quite clear on this matter.

----------


## AuH20

Am I the only one who doesn't feel bad for the Palestinians in Gaza after they stirred up a hornet's nest with the rockets? You have to be borderline retarded to pick a fight with Israel considering the shape of their fighting force. And the most repulsive aspect is that Hamas is not letting some Palestinians leave the more dangerous areas because they want a high death toll. Both sides are a mess.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> Am I the only one who doesn't feel bad for the Palestinians in Gaza after they stirred up a hornet's nest with the rockets? You have to be borderline retarded to pick a fight with Israel considering the shape of their fighting force. And the most repulsive aspect is that Hamas is not letting some Palestinians leave the more dangerous areas because they want a high death toll. Both sides are a mess.


The dead children stirred no hornet's nest. What stirred a hornet's nest to come would be the support of Israel as they commit these sorts of atrocities. The children's machined gunned, mangled corpses will be spread throughout all of West Asia and North, West, Central, and East Africa.

We're talking over 90% civilian mortality rate with the other 10% being arguable at best.

The hell are you babbling about, "Palestinians"? As if this was some concerted, country wide attack.

----------


## twomp

> Am I the only one who doesn't feel bad for the Palestinians in Gaza after they stirred up a hornet's nest with the rockets? You have to be borderline retarded to pick a fight with Israel considering the shape of their fighting force. And the most repulsive aspect is that Hamas is not letting some Palestinians leave the more dangerous areas because they want a high death toll. Both sides are a mess.


The side that wants the big death total is currently achieving its goal. Just ask those 4 kids playing soccer on the beach who were hunted down. Shoot kids. Blame Hamas and the sheep will believe you. Baaaaaaaa

----------


## AuH20

> The side that wants the big death total is currently achieving its goal. Just ask those 4 kids playing soccer on the beach who were hunted down. Shoot kids. Blame Hamas and the sheep will believe you. Baaaaaaaa


If they wanted a huge death toll, they would have carpet bombed the entire area.

----------


## enhanced_deficit

> I support Israel because I see them as a party that would accept a peace. I do not believe Muslim extremists would ever do so. And I do not see any movement in the general population to resist or reform this extremist political position.
> 
> I do not support our government allying our nation with Israel, but as an individual I support Israel for the reasons stated.


Why do you think Israel created Hamas and wanted to weaken secular PLO and Christian led PLFP?  Because they were far more "extreme" than Hamasif you have read history.
It was necessity for Israel to create a cntrolled  group like "Islamist"  Hamas with built-in spies  to divide Palstinians  along religious lines,  to weaken secular Christian led groups like PLO,  PLFP and to repaint   the occupation battles as a "clash of civilization"  among the simple  minded folks within the 'West". 

Secular and some Christian Palestinian militants like George Habash were   far more "extremist" in their tactics against USTF Israeli occupation.

*Terrorism's Christian Godfather; Checking in for a flight has never been the same since 1967*

*Palestinian Christian leader in Canada: Shoot Israeli Jews if they don’t leave Jerusalem*

----------


## ibaghdadi

As a Palestinian (and a libertarian) whose life has been (and is being) directly affected by this conflict, I felt I'm obliged to comment.




> 1) Israel is our strongest ally in the part of the world where folks are the most hostile toward the United States. The United States has spent a long time playing Russian Roulette with countries in the Middle East (i.e. arming ISIS in Syria, and fighting against them in Iraq)..but Israel has *almost always been our ally.


Ah, this can get very complex. To start, it puts the cart before the horse. Many Arabs are hostile towards the United States precisely _because_ of its "special relationship" with Israel. You may say that "Israel has always been our ally", but on this side people see it as "The US has always been on Israel's side".




> 2) The anger is directed towards Israel as if they are our enemy. You can disagree with actions that Israel takes in terms of military strategy without expressing hatred of Israel and their people.


Agreed, in principle. However you should realize that the Jewish population of Israel is shifting dangerously towards the right. Open racism - even racist mobs and riots - have become common. And I say this as someone who has many peace-loving Jewish Israeli friends.

Moreover, being a democracy (albeit an "ethnic" one), the actions of Isreal's government can be said to genuinely represent the will of its people. The same cannot be said of most (all?) Arab regimes, including the Palestinians.




> 3) The power of the AIPAC lobby - just like liberals broadly lump in all gun owners in with the NRA, it is unfair to broadly lump all the folks in Israel with AIPAC. The anger should be dedicated towards the politicians who allow AIPAC to have such a heavy influence on their decision making when it comes to foreign policy - not Israel.


Again, agreed in principle. However I should also note that certain American pro-Israeli groups are even more extreme than AIPAC, and it would be wrong to attribute this only to politics. Religion - I'm afraid - plays an important part.




> 4) The foreign aid the United States sends to Israel isn't Israel's fault. If you were offered billions in aid from the United States, would you say NO? Absolutely not. The anger here should be directed towards our politicians who try to buy influence with foreign leaders using foreign aid as a tool to do so.


Agreed again. However, the answer to "if you were offered billions of aid from the United States, would you say NO" isn't as intuitive as you present. In my case, I'd ask, "OK, in return for what?" Many pro-revolution Egyptians, for example, actively campaigned for the US to cut all aid to Egypt (it all goes to the autocratic, corrupt military).




> It is just this guy's opinion that it is absurd to oppose everything that Israel, an ally of the United States, does


I've never felt that people here "oppose everything that is Israel", and I think most criticism is justified. However, as a Palestinian, here's what I find regularly irritating:
People who give Hamas a carte blanche; Hamas has been involved in terrorism and their rule in Gaza has been undemocraticEquating Gaza (or the Palestinians) with Hamas; Hamas actually (until the current events) had a very low approval rating among PalestiniansPeople who seem to have a soft spot for Iran; Palestinians have long suffered due to the Iranian government's intervention, even as many regular Iranians only have the best of intentions

----------


## ibaghdadi

> Am I the only one who doesn't feel bad for the Palestinians in Gaza after they stirred up a hornet's nest with the rockets? You have to be borderline retarded to pick a fight with Israel considering the shape of their fighting force. And the most repulsive aspect is that Hamas is not letting some Palestinians leave the more dangerous areas because they want a high death toll. Both sides are a mess.


Wow, not sure where to start. First of all, not everyone in Gaza supports Hamas. In fact, right until the recent flare up, 70% of the population of Gaza wanted Hamas to maintain the ceasefire and nearly 60% wanted the unified Palestinian government to renounce all violence (source).

However, predictably, when Israel attacks so indiscriminately, Palestinian opposition to Hamas will immediately, instantly fly out of the window. I'd bet that Hamas approval ratings are very high in Gaza now (meanwhile right before the flare up, a Pew poll suggested that their approval rating among all Palestinians is under 20%).

As for Hamas "not letting some Palestinians leave", I'd like to see that sourced. Gaza is very tiny, and it's home to over 1.6 million people. It's not like there are many places for people to leave towards (many are already refugees).

As for your assessment that "you must be retarded to pick a fight with Israel", the fact is that Hamas already considers itself to have won this round, regardless of civilian casualties or infrastructure damage. In any fight between a massively powerful side and an underdog, the underdog merely needs to stay standing to the end to claim victory.

Now: Does Hamas want more civilian casualties? I can't say for sure, but it certainly seems expedient for them, and some of their leaders have previously made comments that suggest that. All mixed up in martyrdom religious rhetoric, of course.

But - again - not to feel bad for innocent civilians that are caught in the middle of this high stakes game? Many of them women & children? That doesn't seem right. It doesn't seem right at all. It doesn't matter how you feel about the players - the minimum obligation of a human being is to feel for the plight of other innocent human beings.

----------


## HOLLYWOOD

Thanks for spending the time correcting this... I get tired of defending facts and challenging the lies and deceit. The world is protesting, I wonder why US media has not covered the atrocities and global protests across the planet?



> *That's the dumbest thing I've ever seen. * 
> 
> Picture #1: The Brits were occupiers but the land wasn't British.  Unless of course you would consider Iraqis to be American during the US occupation of Iraq.
> Picture #2: Of course they rejected the plan.  This was their home, their land.  Just because foreigners had "a plan" for *their* homes doesn't mean they should give it up.
> Picture #3: This is about half true, but none of it really helps your case.  For example Egypt before 1959 was largely aiding the All-Palestine Government in fighting back Israeli incursions.
> Picture #4: This is just pure ignorance.  Palestinians live under constant oppression, military incursions, severely restricted movement, and blockades.  Any concept you have of Palestinian self-governance here is a farce.  The only thing coming close to self-governance is Hamas in Gaza, which is obviously not Israel-approved.

----------


## THX 1138

> 



The woman on the left is Anna Baltzer, an anti-Zionist Jew. I met her several years ago; I found her to be an excellent speaker and very cool person. 



To answer the OP: 

I do not consider Israel to be an "ally" for several reasons. 

1. They are the worst repeat offender of intelligence theft against the US throughout the entire international community. And not only have they merely stolen our intel, they've actually tried to sell it to Russia and China. 

2. Israel is the only Middle Eastern nation that has ever attacked the US without provocation. I refer to the attack on the USS Liberty, as well as the Lavon Affair. 

3. AIPAC, along with various other pro-Zionist groups (and individuals), are known for manipulating and/or even bullying US politicians who have the nerve to try and put US interests above those of Israel. 

4. Although I'm not a Christian, I find it bizarre and disgusting that Christians are often treated like absolute trash in Israel. Christians probably get better treatment in Iran than in Israel - and that's saying something. 

5. For a nation that's only about the size of New Jersey, Israel has quite a morbid history of sexual slavery and kidnapping. 

6. Israel is a National Socialist state. Government owns approximately 75% of the land there. If the policies of the government of Israel were ever implemented in the US, pro-Israel conservatives would be the first ones to criticize it as "leftist, big government" nonsense. And they would be _right_! 

7. "We, the Jewish people, control America - and the Americans know it".  - Ariel Sharon, October 2001

8. "My opinion of Christian Zionists? They're scum. But don't tell them that. We need all the useful idiots we can get right now." -Benjamin Netanyahu

Ultimately, I agree with you, OP. It is our own government's fault - not Israel's - for being corrupt and weak-willed enough to actually hand over billions of taxpayer dollars a year to this nation - without question and without conditions. 

In reality we should not be giving money away to ANY nation without strict and thorough conditions. As a taxpayer, I do feel that I have the right to question what happens to the money I worked to earn. I hope this helps answer your questions.

----------


## thoughtomator

To put this all in proper perspective, what the US did to American Indians (and a long list of other peoples since) is far, far worse than either case - and as justice has not been done here, who are we to tell them what to do over there?

The US has a "beam in its own eye" problem when condemning any other nation's behavior.

----------


## pcosmar

*You can shove your antisemitism Slander and Smears  up your ass.*

I oppose Zionism,, on both political and spiritual reasons.

----------


## AuH20

> Stop spreading lies.


The concept of Palestine is an artificial creation derived exclusively to combat the jews in 1964. There is no native Palestinian homeland. There never was. Most of the land was uninhabitable until the Romans and later the Israelis drained most of the land. With that said, you can make a compelling argument that a sizable amount of the people residing in Israel aren't necessarily true jews and therefore the covenant excuse is null & void.

----------


## pcosmar

> The concept of Palestine is an artificial creation derived exclusively to combat the jews in 1964.


Bull$#@!.

It was Palestine when the Romans invaded it. It was Palestine under several occupations and under British occupation.
It was Palestine when Zionism was created. in the late 1800s..

It was Palestine when Christ walked the earth.

you might even want to listen to that old Palestinian Jew in the video I posted.

----------


## AuH20

> Bull$#@!.
> 
> It was Palestine when the Romans invaded it. It was Palestine under several occupations and under British occupation.
> It was Palestine when Zionism was created. in the late 1800s..
> 
> It was Palestine when Christ walked the earth.
> 
> you might even want to listen to that old Palestinian Jew in the video I posted.


Palestine doesn't have a specific people. The term 'Palestine' is derived from Philistine thanks to the Romans, who have a sinister sense of humor. Palestinians are not Phillistines (from the Aegean Sea) or vice versa.

----------


## acptulsa

If there was no Palestine in February 1918 then what is this RAAF Bristol doing there?

----------


## pcosmar

> Palestine doesn't have a specific people. Palestine is derived from Philistine thanks to the Romans, who have a sinister sense of humor. Palestinians are not Phillistines (from the Aegean Sea) or vice versa.


And all of that is irrelevant. People lived there,, for thousands of years. While the Crusades were fought though their lands.. and while various empires claimed it.

The people that lived there and still do live there are the Palestinian people.

And there are Zionists,, who invaded the land in the early 1900s,,, and created a "country" in 1947.

----------


## AuH20

> And all of that is irrelevant. People lived there,, for thousands of years. While the Crusades were fought though their lands.. and while various empires claimed it.
> *
> The people that lived there and still do live there are the Palestinian people.*
> 
> And there are Zionists,, who invaded the land in the early 1900s,,, and created a "country" in 1947.


The Palestinians, until their relatively recent PR stunt, always considered themselves members of Syria and Egypt. I'm no fan of the zionists but people are blind to the facts:




> *Prior to partition, Palestinian Arabs did not view themselves as having a separate identity. When the First Congress of Muslim-Christian Associations met in Jerusalem in February 1919 to choose Palestinian representatives for the Paris Peace Conference, the following resolution was adopted:”We consider Palestine as part of Arab Syria, as it has never been separated from it at any time. We are connected with it by national, religious, linguistic, natural, economic and geographical bonds.”*





> *“There is no such country [as Palestine]! ‘Palestine’ is a term the Zionists invented! There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria.”- Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, a local Arab leader, to the Peel Commission, 1937*





> *“It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but southern Syria.”- Ahmed Shuqeiri, later the chairman of the PLO, to the UN Security Council*





> Syrian President Hafez Assad once told PLO leader Yassir Arafat:
> 
> *“You do not represent Palestine as much as we do. Never forget this one point: There is no such thing as a Palestinian People, there is no Palestinian entity, there is only Syria. You are an integral part of the Syrian people, Palestine is an integral part of Syria. Therefore it is we, the Syrian authorities, who are the true representatives of the Palestinian people.”
> *
> 
> *Assad stated on March 8, 1974, “Palestine is a principal part of Southern Syria, and we consider that it is our right and duty to insist that it be a liberated partner of our Arab homeland and of Syria.”*





> *In the words of the late military commander of the PLO as well as member of the PLO Executive Council, Zuhair Muhsin:
> 
> “There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity….yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel.”*

----------


## pcosmar

> The Palestinians, until their recent PR stunt, always considered themselves members of Syria and Egypt. I'm no fan of the zionists but people are blind to the facts:


Wrong.
Some Syrians consider Palestine theirs. And possibly some Egyptians too. Maybe some Jordanians as well. They all have interests there.

The Zionists are the new kids on the block,, and they are not making friends.

----------


## acptulsa

> The Palestinians, until their recent PR stunt, always considered themselves members of Syria and Egypt. I'm no fan of the zionists but people are blind to the facts:


Texas has been part of Spain, Mexico and France.  Since 1845 it has been one of the United States.  Does that mean it doesn't exist?  Does that mean it didn't exist until they got sick of being mistreated by Mexico?

If you want to argue with someone and call them ignorant, why not start with T.E. Lawrence of Arabia?




> In early 1914 Woolley and Lawrence, at the request of the British Museum, accompanied a survey party making maps in the Sinai Desert. While Lawrence undertook an archaeological survey (which he described as providing ‘archaeological colour to a political job’ as permission was required from the Turks who controlled this area) the topographical work was carried out by Captain Newcombe who later worked with Lawrence during the Arab Revolt.  This survey, sponsored by the PEF, was tasked with *extending southwards the previous PEF Survey of Western Palestine carried out in the 1870s.* The 1914 survey (published by Woolley and Lawrence as The Wilderness of Zin, PEF Annual III, 1915) later greatly assisted Lawrence because of the surveying and map-making skills he learnt and also the first-hand knowledge he gained of the terrain, especially in the Aqaba area.


http://www.pef.org.uk/profiles/lt-co...-dso-1888-1935

When the British Colonial Office appointed governors of Palestine and put it on their maps of the British Empire, was that an Arabian PR stunt?

----------


## AuH20

> Wrong.
> Some Syrians consider Palestine theirs. And possibly some Egyptians too. Maybe some Jordanians as well. They all have interests there.
> 
> The Zionists are the new kids on the block,, and they are not making friends.


But the point is that there is not a distinct Palestine people. There never has been one. It's a myth. Palestine was a location and a largely uninhabited one at that due to swampland. Both sides lie their ass off so as to conjure sympathy for their causes. This is no different.

----------


## acptulsa

> But the point is that there is not a distinct Palestine people. There never has been one. It's a myth. Palestine was a location and a largely uninhabited one at that due to swampland. Both sides lie their ass off so as to conjure sympathy for their causes. This is no different.


Who's lying?  Would you like to see the name 'Palestine' in Col. Lawrence's own handwriting?

http://www.shapell.org/manuscript.as...-seven-pillars

Who cares if they named themselves or the British named them?  They existed, they were there (you did say this Sainai Desert 'swampland' was '_largely_' uninhabited did you not?), the British messed with them for generations, the UN came in and started forcibly moving other people onto their lands, and blood has been getting spilled ever since--without once nourishing any Trees of Liberty because it's seldom the tyrants themselves who furnish it.

Someone has been listening to PR all right.  So, since North Dakota is 'largely uninhabited' we should shoot everyone there and move the Kurds in?

----------


## pcosmar

> But the point is that there is not a distinct Palestine people.


You mean like a specific RACE,, or a single RELIGION..
No,, there were many people that settled there of various religions that had lived there for centuries being ruled by some neighboring empire or another.
There was no Nationalism. That $#@! was imported from Europe.  like an infection.

----------


## AuH20

> Texas has been part of Spain, Mexico and France.  Since 1845 it has been one of the United States.  Does that mean it doesn't exist?  Does that mean it didn't exist until they got sick of being mistreated by Mexico?
> 
> If you want to argue with someone and call them ignorant, why not start with T.E. Lawrence of Arabia?
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.pef.org.uk/profiles/lt-co...-dso-1888-1935
> 
> When the British Colonial Office appointed governors of Palestine and put it on their maps of the British Empire, was that an Arabian PR stunt?


Palestine or greater Syria is a location. It is a geographical term, used to designate the region at those times in history when there is no nation or state there.

----------


## acptulsa

> Palestine or greater Syria is a location. It is a geographical term, used to designate the region at those times in history when there is no nation or state there.


North Dakota is largely uninhabited.  Should we relocate them all and shoot the ones that won't go to make room for the embattled Kurds?

After all, technically they aren't North Dakotans, they're Americans...

----------


## AuH20

> North Dakota is largely uninhabited.  Should we relocate them all and shoot the ones that won't go to make room for the embattled Kurds?
> 
> After all, technically they aren't North Dakotans, they're Americans...


You do realize that the Zionists largely purchased the land from Arab land owners leading up to 1948? So if the citizens of North Dakota were foolish enough to sell their stake to wealthy Kurds, I guess that would be alright.

----------


## acptulsa

> You do realize that the Zionists largely purchased the land from Arab land owners leading up to 1948? So if the citizens of North Dakota were foolish enough to sell their stake to wealthy Kurds, I guess that would be alright.


Are we seriously contending that all of the present Israel except the Gaza Strip and the West Bank was bought by Zionists before 1948?

You suppose if Kurds did buy up North Dakota they'd be allowed to secede?

----------


## pcosmar

> You do realize that the Zionists largely purchased the land from Arab land owners leading up to 1948?


Some perhaps. But most of it was like the Railroad at the James Farm. 

Much like they are still being pushed out today.

----------


## robert68

> To put this all in proper perspective, what the US did to American Indians (and a long list of other peoples since) is far, far worse than either case - and as justice has not been done here, who are we to tell them what to do over there?
> 
> The US has a "beam in its own eye" problem when condemning any other nation's behavior.


Zionists love to play the “American Indians” card on Americans. But just one of the differences between the two situations is if the Palestinians had the citizenship rights the Native Americans do in the US, the Palestinians would have an easy voting majority in their native land Palestine, almost flipping the Jewish/Palestinian demographic balance that presently exists in Israel.

----------


## robert68

> You do realize that the Zionists largely purchased the land from Arab land owners leading up to 1948? So if the citizens of North Dakota were foolish enough to sell their stake to wealthy Kurds, I guess that would be alright.


The fact is Jews held around 7% of the land in Palestine in 1947, and most of that land was acquired from absentee landlords, not the true owners.

----------


## lilymc

> Israel is an apartheid state with unbounded racism and hate towards the Palestinians.  Israel was formed by aggressively forcing the Palestinians out of their land and murdering anybody who got in their way.  Our continued support of them and their behavior is a large part of why that region hates us.  (That, and we drop bombs on them, which also doesn't help)


This is exactly the kind of one-sided thinking that a couple here have been talking about.

I'm not on this site very much, so maybe I just haven't read the more balanced, truthful replies.  So I'm not going to claim that no one ever criticizes the other side.

However, based on what I have seen, it's always the sort of thing you just said.  "Israel is evil" "Israel is racist"  "Israel is hateful, Israel discriminates"  yadda yadda yadda.

Hello????  Am I in the twilight zone here, or what?  If you don't realize how extreme the Muslim hatred is against Jews, and how they are raised to hate Jews with a passion, and how they do NOT want peace, they want all Jews dead..... then you guys are either willfully blind, or woefully misinformed.

Now before I get tarred and feathered, and chased off of this site.... I'm not pro Israel.   I'm pro honesty and fairness.  

I'm not talking about you in particular, it's a general "you" when I say that if you're going to talk about racism, hate, murder, etc... then you better talk about the Muslim extreme hatred, to the point of being diabolical. And how they teach their kids from the youngest age that Jews should die, and how they DON'T want peace. They never have. They have always wanted Jews dead, or out of the Middle East.

If you're going to talk about institutional racism, then talk about how in certain Muslim countries (like Saudi Arabia) Jews aren't allowed to live there (while the reverse is not true) and the hatred toward Jews is woven into every aspect of their society.  In Saudi Arabia there also is no religious freedom, if you are a Christian or a believer of some other religion, you can't openly practice it.

Although Israel is called a Jewish state, last I checked, Muslims, Christians, or others can practice their religion there.   

How many of you here have lived in, or even visited a Muslim country?   How many of you have been to Israel?

That's not a rhetorical question, I honestly want to know.

----------


## lilymc

> Bull$#@!.
> 
> It was Palestine when the Romans invaded it. It was Palestine under several occupations and under British occupation.
> It was Palestine when Zionism was created. in the late 1800s..
> 
> It was Palestine when Christ walked the earth.
> 
> you might even want to listen to that old Palestinian Jew in the video I posted.


I think what he was saying was that it was always a region, not a nation or one distinct group of people.

----------


## twomp

> This is exactly the kind of one-sided thinking that a couple here have been talking about.
> 
> I'm not on this site very much, so maybe I just haven't read the more balanced, truthful replies.  So I'm not going to claim that no one ever criticizes the other side.
> 
> However, based on what I have seen, it's always the sort of thing you just said.  "Israel is evil" "Israel is racist"  "Israel is hateful, Israel discriminates"  yadda yadda yadda.
> 
> Hello????  Am I in the twilight zone here, or what?  If you don't realize how extreme the Muslim hatred is against Jews, and how they are raised to hate Jews with a passion, and how they do NOT want peace, they want all Jews dead..... then you guys are either willfully blind, or woefully misinformed.
> 
> Now before I get tarred and feathered, and chased off of this site.... I'm not pro Israel.   I'm pro honesty and fairness.  
> ...


What does being there have to do with anything? One side has airplanes, tanks, drones and nukes. The other side has shoulder rockets and slingshots. Yet, the media continually only talks about one side. The media only supports one side. IF this is David vs. Goliath. Which side do you think is Goliath?

You and your army of low post Israel first friends around here all sound the same. Indoctrinated by the MSM/AIPAC/Israel into actually believing that the bullies are the victims here. Either that or you are paid to say what you say. We know the Israeli government wouldn't be shy to do that now don't we?

----------


## twomp

> This is exactly the kind of one-sided thinking that a couple here have been talking about.
> 
> I'm not on this site very much, so maybe I just haven't read the more balanced, truthful replies.  So I'm not going to claim that no one ever criticizes the other side.
> 
> However, based on what I have seen, it's always the sort of thing you just said.  "Israel is evil" "Israel is racist"  "Israel is hateful, Israel discriminates"  yadda yadda yadda.
> 
> Hello????  Am I in the twilight zone here, or what?  If you don't realize how extreme the Muslim hatred is against Jews, and how they are raised to hate Jews with a passion, and how they do NOT want peace, they want all Jews dead..... then you guys are either willfully blind, or woefully misinformed.
> 
> Now before I get tarred and feathered, and chased off of this site.... I'm not pro Israel.   I'm pro honesty and fairness.  
> ...


New law dividing Christian, Muslim Arabs legalizes inequality




> Israel ratified a new law that legally distinguishes between Muslim and Christian citizens of the state, Haaretz reported Monday. The bill, which easily passed by a 31-6 vote in its third and final reading, recognizes the Christian Arab population as a separate, though not national minority for the first time.
> 
> The law, which expands the Advisory Committee for Equal Opportunity in the Employment Commission by adding to it a separate Christian representative, was marketed as a way to better integrate Christians into the Israeli workforce. However, in practice, it is being carried out at the blatant expense of Muslim citizens. There are approximately 160,000 Christians living in Israel, compared with over a million Muslim  citizens.
> 
> According to the bill’s sponsor, Likud MK Yariv Levin, Christians are “our natural allies, a counterbalance against the Muslims who want to destroy the state from within.” Levin, an outspoken opponent of the establishment of a Palestinian state (like other fellow MKs in Likud and the Jewish Home party) also emphasized that he refuses to call Christian citizens “Arabs.” “I’m being careful about not calling them Arabs because they aren’t Arabs,” he told the Israeli daily Ma’ariv a few weeks ago, despite the fact that the large majority of them are, in fact, Arabs, and many identify as part of the Palestinian nation.
> 
> Through the Knesset’s passing of the law, along with Levin’s candid comments, the Israeli government has made two things abundantly clear (if they weren’t already):
> 
> 1. “Arab” is a bad word, and the Muslim Arab population specifically – the largest minority in the country –  is made up of evil citizens intent on destroying the state, and are therefore not eligible to have equal rights.
> ...


I guess there goes your "we are all eqaul in Israel" argument now doesn't it? Quick go ask your handler or FOX News how you should reply.

http://972mag.com/new-law-seeks-to-d...m-arabs/87705/

----------


## lilymc

> What does being there have to do with anything? One side has airplanes, tanks, drones and nukes. The other side has shoulder rockets and slingshots. Yet, the media continually only talks about one side. The media only supports one side. IF this is David vs. Goliath. Which side do you think is Goliath?
> 
> You and your army of low post Israel first friends around here all sound the same. Indoctrinated by the MSM/AIPAC/Israel into actually believing that the bullies are the victims here. Either that or you are paid to say what you say. We know the Israeli government wouldn't be shy to do that now don't we?


1)  Some of the wealthiest countries in the world are Muslims nations in the Middle East.  So let's not pretend that the poor little palestinians are alone in the battle against big bad Israel.   They (the palestinians) have always been used as pawns, in the neverending battle in the M.E.  Their Muslim "brothers" don't care about the innocent women and children, if they did, they wouldn't use them as human shields, and they prolong the whole mess. They don't want peace, they want Jews dead, or out of the Middle East.

You are romanticizing the plight of the palestinians, while ignoring the reality that they are pawns. You're also ignoring that the majority of them SUPPORT using terrorism tactics and targeting civilians.    

2) Indoctrinated?  That is laughable. I don't even watch TV.    The reason I asked if you have been there is because I have.  I lived in Saudi Arabia for 2 years (long time ago, but the situation hasn't changed, if anything it's worse).  And I've also been to Israel.

In fact, when my family went back to Saudi Arabia (after taking a vacation) we couldn't have an Israel stamp in our passport, or else we wouldn't have been allowed back in.  So we had to have the stamp on a separate sheet of paper.

When I lived in Saudi Arabia, it was like being in a different world it was so backwards.    I remember Israel as being a modern country, where women, non-Jews, and other minorities had rights.   It was the exact opposite in Saudi Arabia. 

If anyone is indoctrinated, it is some here who for some strange reason have chosen to believe the worst about one side, and glossed over or romanticized the other.

----------


## lilymc

> New law dividing Christian, Muslim Arabs legalizes inequality
> 
> 
> 
> I guess there goes your "we are all eqaul in Israel" argument now doesn't it? Quick go ask your handler or FOX News how you should reply.
> 
> http://972mag.com/new-law-seeks-to-d...m-arabs/87705/



You totally missed my point.  The point was that you're ignoring that the other side is the exact same way (only way worse!) And it been that way for a long time, in the Arab/Muslim countries.  

I'm not here to defend Israel.  I was pointing out the one-sidedness, and distorted reality.

----------


## pcosmar

> I think what he was saying was that it was always a region, not a nation or one distinct group of people.


And what does that have to do with the Zionists moving in and stealing land and murdering people.?

Yes it is a region. No, They have no Nationalism (good for them)

The Zionists have been provoking and inciting since their creation. even before the Huge resources of the Rothschilds bought off the United Nations.

The whole purpose of Israel is to provoke war.  And they do.

----------


## Danke

> This is exactly the kind of one-sided thinking that a couple here have been talking about.
> 
> I'm not on this site very much, so maybe I just haven't read the more balanced, truthful replies.  So I'm not going to claim that no one ever criticizes the other side.
> 
> However, based on what I have seen, it's always the sort of thing you just said.  "Israel is evil" "Israel is racist"  "Israel is hateful, Israel discriminates"  yadda yadda yadda.
> 
> Hello????  Am I in the twilight zone here, or what?  If you don't realize how extreme the Muslim hatred is against Jews, and how they are raised to hate Jews with a passion, and how they do NOT want peace, they want all Jews dead..... then you guys are either willfully blind, or woefully misinformed.
> 
> Now before I get tarred and feathered, and chased off of this site.... I'm not pro Israel.   I'm pro honesty and fairness.  
> ...


Spent a fair amount of time in Turkey and been to Israel twice on military exercises.

----------


## lilymc

> And what does that have to do with the Zionists moving in and stealing land and murdering people.?
> 
> Yes it is a region. No, They have no Nationalism (good for them)
> 
> The Zionists have been provoking and inciting since their creation. even before the Huge resources of the Rothschilds bought off the United Nations.
> 
> The whole purpose of Israel is to provoke war.  And they do.


You can argue that Israel should never have been created in the first place (I think that's pointless, because what's done is done.)  But I see a lot of people re-writing history here, and that to me is extremely sad.

I wasn't planning on getting into any heavy debates on the whole conflict.  There's not enough time in the day for that.

I don't see either side as the victim.  What I do see is that one of the sides doesn't want peace. They never have... and they never will.  Because it's not just about land  (since you know, Israel takes up such a huge part of the ME).   The conflict is about much more than that, and it goes way, way back, thousands of years.

----------


## twomp

> You totally missed my point.  The point was that you're ignoring that the other side is the exact same way (only way worse!) And it been that way for a long time, in the Arab/Muslim countries.  
> 
> I'm not here to defend Israel.  I was pointing out the one-sidedness, and distorted reality.


Oh please, there isn't another forum that is more vocal about Saudi Arabia than this forum. How many posts have you seen where people around here are venting about Saudi Arabia and how many of the hijackers on 9/11 were from Saudi Arabia. This post has NOTHING to do with Saudi Arabia which incidentally seem to be pretty good pals with the Israelis in their crusade to rid the world of all things Iranian.

I don't see you posting in those posts but curiously when Israel comes up, here you are. The disdain for the Israeli government here is just that. I doubt many people here have any issues with the Israeli people themselves. It's the Israeli government that is the problem. They are not as even handed and fair to minorities as you and the mainstream media say they are. Their manipulation of their media AND ours has left us with an entire population that thinks like you. 

You and your Israel first attitudes may be a minority on these forums but you guys and your way of thinking is the way most Americans think. You can go to almost any forum outside of a few forums like ours where your ideas will be welcome and celebrated but please don't think that the "omg poor Israel" attitude will go far around here. The folks of this forums have their eyes wide open.

----------


## jjdoyle

Being born and raised as a Southern Baptist, you might think I would agree 100% with you that Israel is our strongest ally, but I do not. Until the U.S. government releases the other 28 pages to the 9/11 Fraud Report, and does a full, open, investigation, I wouldn't call a country that is suspected to have picked up on the 9/11 attacks and didn't warn us, as an ally:





Skip to the :58 second mark for the Israel and 9/11 information part.

*Is there a reason video embeds to YouTube videos don't always work? I'm trying to provide a link to a video, and start it at the point of discussion, and it almost always fails when I do that.

----------


## lilymc

> Oh please, there isn't another forum that is more vocal about Saudi Arabia than this forum. How many posts have you seen where people around here are venting about Saudi Arabia and how many of the hijackers on 9/11 were from Saudi Arabia. This post has NOTHING to do with Saudi Arabia which incidentally seem to be pretty good pals with the Israelis in their crusade to rid the world of all things Iranian.
> 
> I don't see you posting in those posts but curiously when Israel comes up, here you are. The disdain for the Israeli government here is just that. I doubt many people here have any issues with the Israeli people themselves. It's the Israeli government that is the problem. They are not as even handed and fair to minorities as you and the mainstream media say they are. Their manipulation of their media AND ours has left us with an entire population that thinks like you. 
> 
> You and your Israel first attitudes may be a minority on these forums but you guys and your way of thinking is the way most Americans think. You can go to almost any forum outside of a few forums like ours where your ideas will be welcome and celebrated but please don't think that the "omg poor Israel" attitude will go far around here. The folks of this forums have their eyes wide open.


I wasn't talking about threads solely devoted to Muslim countries, like Saudi Arabia.  I was talking about threads devoted to the conflict between Israel and its enemies.

On THOSE threads what I have seen is very one-sided.  But I stated from the start that I'm not here that much, so it could be that I just haven't seen the criticism of the other side.

And please don't label me when you don't even know me.  I'm not "Israel first."   I already said, I am for honesty and fairness.  Whenever I see someone ranting on about "Racism! Discrimination! Murder!" and all that, while ignoring that the other side is guilty of those things, and is even worse... it irritates me.

----------


## otherone

> Hello????  Am I in the twilight zone here, or what?  If you don't realize how extreme the Muslim hatred is against Jews, and how they are raised to hate Jews with a passion, and how they do NOT want peace, they want all Jews dead..... then you guys are either willfully blind, or woefully misinformed.


You are confused.  Historically it's been_ Christians_ who hate Jews. Jews and Muslims have peacefully coexisted in the Mideast for 1500 years.  It's _Israelis_ that Muslims hate.

----------


## otherone

> But the point is that there is not a distinct Palestine people. There never has been one.


Ah.  Got it.
So what should we call the people that the state of Israel has been murdering?   Southern Syrians?

----------


## lilymc

> You are confused.  Historically it's been_ Christians_ who hate Jews. Jews and Muslims have peacefully coexisted in the Mideast for 1500 years.  It's _Israelis_ that Muslims hate.


BS.  Sure, there were nominal Christians in the past who disliked Jews, or were suspicious of them, but practicing Christians have never hated Jews.  

The conflict between Muslims and Jews goes all the way back to the sibling rivalry between Ishmael and Isaac.

----------


## otherone

> BS.  Sure, there were nominal Christians in the past who disliked Jews, or were suspicious of them, but practicing Christians have never hated Jews.


Seriously?  I mean....seriously?  really. seriously?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_in_Europe

----------


## lilymc

> Seriously?  I mean....seriously?  really. seriously?


Did I stutter?    

What do you disagree with?    Jesus was  Jew.   Christianity is,  in a sense,  the completion of Judaism.     

You seem to not understand the difference between nominal Christians and people who actually believe and practice the teachings of Christ.

----------


## otherone

> Did I stutter?    
> 
> What do you disagree with?    Jesus was  Jew.   Christianity is,  in a sense,  the completion of Judaism.     
> 
> You seem to not understand the difference between nominal Christians and people who actually believe and practice the teachings of Christ.


Ah.  So the antisemitism RAMPANT throughout Christian Europe's history was from "nominal" Christians.   Thanks for the clarification!
I'm sure the distinction wasn't lost on all the Jews murdered and tortured by "nominal" Christians!

----------


## lilymc

> Ah.  So the antisemitism RAMPANT throughout Christian Europe's history was from "nominal" Christians.   Thanks for the clarification!
> I'm sure the distinction wasn't lost on all the Jews murdered and tortured by "nominal" Christians!


Wow.  I'm not even going to bother, because a comment like that is not even worthy of a reply.  Are you an atheist, by chance?

----------


## twomp

When you say stuff like this:



> Hello????  Am I in the twilight zone here, or what?  If you don't realize how extreme the Muslim hatred is against Jews, and how they are raised to hate Jews with a passion, and how they do NOT want peace, they want all Jews dead..... then you guys are either willfully blind, or woefully misinformed.


It pretty much invalidates what you say when you say this:



> And please don't label me when you don't even know me.  I'm not "Israel first."   *I already said, I am for honesty and fairness.*  Whenever I see someone ranting on about "Racism! Discrimination! Murder!" and all that, while ignoring that the other side is guilty of those things, and is even worse... it irritates me.


You can't say something stupid like all Muslims "are raised to hate Jews with a passion" then say you want to be "honest and fair." You sound like Fox News, "Fair and balanced" when that is the furthest from the truth. Your hatred of all things Muslim shows your Israeli/AIPAC/MSM indoctrination. The Israeli carry the biggest stick on the block and on top of that, they have big brother U.S.A watching their back along with NATO and the EU yet you are here playing the Israeli victim card. More Muslim civilians have been killed by Israelis than Israeli civilians have been killed by Muslims. 

The score card isn't even REMOTELY CLOSE. Go to almost any other internet website and you will find see how many other Israeli firsters like you are out there. You will find much more sympathy for your cause there. Like I said, around here. Our eyes are open.

----------


## HOLLYWOOD

Gaza is the world's largest and longest operating concentration camp in history. 

This is the creation of hatred and it's been going on for 50 years...

----------


## lilymc

> You can't say something stupid like all Muslims "are raised to hate Jews with a passion" then say you want to be "honest and fair." You sound like Fox News, "Fair and balanced" when that is the furthest from the truth. Your hatred of all things Muslim shows your Israeli/AIPAC/MSM indoctrination. The Israeli carry the biggest stick in the block and on top of that, they have big brother U.S.A watching their back along with NATO and the EU yet you are here playing the Israeli victim card. More Muslim civilians have been killed by Israelis than Israeli civilians have been killed by Muslims. 
> 
> The score card isn't even REMOTELY CLOSE. Go to almost any other internet website and you will find see how many other Israeli firsters like you are out there. You will find much more sympathy for your cause there. Like I said, around here. Our eyes are open.


Relax.  First of all, I absolutely do NOT hate all things Muslim, that is a lie.    Like I told you, I lived in a Muslim country, and I have good memories of the people, for the most part.  In fact, I have a heart for both Muslims and Jews.  And maybe (at some point) I would like to do missions work in a place where there are Muslims and Jews.

And for the second time, I don't watch any of the network news channels.  Nobody tells me what to think.  I am an independent thinker, and I'm more than able to come to a position, based on the things I have seen with my own eyes.

Of course not EVERY Muslim teaches their kids to hate Jews.  But to ignore that there is a hatred that is deeply woven into their society is to be willfully blind.

And what you aren't acknowledging is that there ARE extreme Muslims who not only teach their young kids to hate Jews, but teach that it's an honor to strap a bomb to yourself and blow up civilians.  This is not from "Fox News."   It's the reality that you are choosing to either disbelieve, or ignore.   The majority of palestinians support using terror as a tactic.  They use women and children for human shields.  Again, not Fox News, this is happening, whether you want to acknowledge it or not.

The only people I have sympathy for are the children, or the ones who truly DO want peace and do NOT support Hamas or using underhanded, evil tactics.  The problem is, the majority do not fit that description.

Like I already said.... I'm not here to debate the entire conflict or to defend Israel.  All I wanted to do is point out the one-sidedness.

----------


## AuH20

> This is exactly the kind of one-sided thinking that a couple here have been talking about.
> 
> I'm not on this site very much, so maybe I just haven't read the more balanced, truthful replies.  So I'm not going to claim that no one ever criticizes the other side.
> 
> However, based on what I have seen, it's always the sort of thing you just said.  "Israel is evil" "Israel is racist"  "Israel is hateful, Israel discriminates"  yadda yadda yadda.
> 
> Hello????  Am I in the twilight zone here, or what?  If you don't realize how extreme the Muslim hatred is against Jews, and how they are raised to hate Jews with a passion, and how they do NOT want peace, they want all Jews dead..... then you guys are either willfully blind, or woefully misinformed.
> 
> Now before I get tarred and feathered, and chased off of this site.... I'm not pro Israel.   I'm pro honesty and fairness.  
> ...


I'm not pro-Israel either. I really dislike American jews and question whether the creation of Israel in retrospect was the best course of action. But I'm not going to sit here and listen to falsehoods perpetrated by the Palestinian establishment and the mainstream media when it is blatantly fiction.

----------


## Massachusetts

> I'm not pro-Israel either. *I really dislike American jews* and question whether the creation of Israel in retrospect was the best course of action. But I'm not going to sit here and listen to falsehoods perpetrated by the Palestinian establishment and the mainstream media when it is blatantly fiction.


Freudian slip? Why do you dislike American jews? What do they have to do with anything?

----------


## AuH20

> Freudian slip? Why do you dislike American jews? What do they have to do with anything?


American jews control the key levers in finance, politics and media. Some are the worst perpetrators of tyranny in this country. It's not even a debate. Look at Schumer, Feinstein, Blankfein, Weinstein, Bloomberg. You can go on and on. It could be a coincidence but many of our harshest overlords are Jewish.

----------


## pcosmar

> I'm not pro-Israel either. I really dislike American jews and question whether the creation of Israel in retrospect was the best course of action. .


Really,,
I have gotten along well with those I have met. Friends even.

I oppose Zionism.

----------


## pcosmar

> American jews control the key levers in finance, politics and media. Some are the worst perpetrators of tyranny in this country. It's not even a debate. Look at Schumer, Feinstein, Blankfein, Weinstein, Bloomberg. You can go on and on. It could be a coincidence but many of our harshest overlords are Jewish.


And you believe they are jews?
On what basis do you believe they are jews?

How do you define it? What is a jew? Is it a race? (I don't believe in race) or is it a religion?

I believe there are a lot who call themselves jews,, that are not.

----------


## AuH20

> And you believe they are jews?
> On what basis do you believe they are jews?
> 
> How do you define it? What is a jew? Is it a race? (I don't believe in race) or is it a religion?
> 
> I believe there are a lot who call themselves jews,, that are not.


For this particular debate, they are jews. They self-identify as such.

----------


## otherone

> Wow.  I'm not even going to bother, because a comment like that is not even worthy of a reply.  Are you an atheist, by chance?


No need to make this personal!
Were you not aware of Europe's rich history of hating the "Christ Killers"?

----------


## amy31416

> Did I stutter?    
> 
> What do you disagree with?    Jesus was  Jew.   *Christianity is,  in a sense,  the completion of Judaism. *  
> 
> You seem to not understand the difference between nominal Christians and people who actually believe and practice the teachings of Christ.


That comment would get you spat upon in Israel. Especially in the settlements or Jerusalem.

----------


## lilymc

> No need to make this personal!
> Were you not aware of Europe's rich history of hating the "Christ Killers"?


I can see we're not getting anywhere.  Do you always equate the entire continent of Europe with genuine followers of Christ?

Because I have been talking about the latter.    

I already replied to the point you're trying to make, so I'm not going to go around in circles here.    Its off topic anyway.

----------


## lilymc

> That comment would get you spat upon in Israel. Especially in the settlements or Jerusalem.


Well, I know that Jews don't agree with that.  If they did, they'd be Messianic Jews. 

Unfortunately, many Jews are spiritually blind... that is not just my opinion, it's what the bible says.  (2 Corinthians 3:14-16)

----------


## pcosmar

> For this particular debate, they are jews. *They self-identify as such*.


The certainly do.  
I think they do it to give jews a bad name. but that is my suspicion.




> I know your afflictions and your poverty—yet you are rich! I know about the slander of those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan.

----------


## Tywysog Cymru

> American jews control the key levers in finance, politics and media. Some are the worst perpetrators of tyranny in this country. It's not even a debate. Look at Schumer, Feinstein, Blankfein, Weinstein, Bloomberg. You can go on and on. It could be a coincidence but many of our harshest overlords are Jewish.


There are millions of American Jews, those are just a handful.  Have you ever met a Jew?

----------


## amy31416

> I'm not pro-Israel either. *I really dislike American jews* and question whether the creation of Israel in retrospect was the best course of action. But I'm not going to sit here and listen to falsehoods perpetrated by the Palestinian establishment and the mainstream media when it is blatantly fiction.


Well that's interesting. Why do you dislike American Jews?

----------


## otherone

> Unfortunately, many Jews are spiritually blind... that is not just my opinion, it's what the bible says.  (2 Corinthians 3:14-16)


I wonder if Torquemada used the same rationale.

----------


## lilymc

> I wonder if Torquemada used the same rationale.


You're good at trolling.  If you have a point to make, make it.

The insinuations,  deceptive comments are red herrings are getting old.

----------


## amy31416

> I wonder if Torquemada used the same rationale.


I think we're finding out who the actual anti-"semites" are around here.

----------


## otherone

> You're good at trolling.  If you have a point to make, make it.


Yeah.
I troll with my message of tolerance.
One can't speak of ALL Muslims, Jews, or Christians.
Otherwise, you know, umm...genocide.

----------


## HOLLYWOOD

UN Chief says war crimes... don't worry, Puppets Obama and Samantha Power are ready to VETO the UN vote


*
Headlines for July 23, 2014 | Democracy Now!*

----------


## lilymc

> I think we're finding out who the actual anti-"semites" are around here.


Wow... are you actually implying that because I said Jews are spiritually blind, I'm anti-semitic?  From a biblical perspective, ANYONE who rejects Jesus/God is spiritually blind.  That means atheists, agnostics, Muslims, pagans, Hindus, etc.     

Stating that someone is spiritually blind doesn't mean you hate them.   By that 'logic', God and Jesus are "anti-semitic" because it is the bible that states that unbelievers are spiritually blind.      Did you not realize that?

I shouldn't even have to say this, but since you and otherone like insinuating dishonest things,  I'll say it.  I love Jews, and Muslims.  I stated earlier that someday I would like to do missions work in a place where there are Muslims and Jews.  

This has actually been kinda funny. First someone accused me of being anti-Muslim because I pointed out the hate against Jews.  Then you (seem to) imply that I'm anti-semitic for stating a truth about spiritual blindness.  

/sigh

----------


## AuH20

> There are millions of American Jews, those are just a handful.  Have you ever met a Jew?


I work and live with Jews. They are deluded in the Northeast. I guess that's what happens in high finance and academia.

----------


## amy31416

> *Wow... are you actually implying that because I said Jews are spiritually blind, I'm anti-semitic?*  From a biblical perspective, ANYONE who rejects Jesus/God is spiritually blind.  That means atheists, agnostics, Muslims, pagans, Hindus, etc.     
> 
> Stating that someone is spiritually blind doesn't mean you hate them.   By that 'logic', God and Jesus are "anti-semitic" because it is the bible that states that unbelievers are spiritually blind.      Did you not realize that?
> 
> I shouldn't even have to say this, but since you and otherone like insinuating dishonest things,  I'll say it.  I love Jews, and Muslims.  I stated earlier that someday I would like to do missions work in a place where there are Muslims and Jews.  
> 
> This has actually been kinda funny. First someone accused me of being anti-Muslim because I pointed out the hate against Jews.  Then you (seem to) imply that I'm anti-semitic for stating a truth about spiritual blindness.  
> 
> /sigh


Yeah. I am.

Live and let live. My gripe with Israel's government is that they steal from us and get us involved in massive warfare. I have absolutely no problem with their religion. You do.

As far as I know, Jesus wouldn't approve of the "modern" state of Israel. You do.

----------


## DFF

The problem with Jews are the _radical_ leftist Jews. 

Those who believe in Keynesian economics, the welfare state, endless warfare and money for Israel, mass immigration, and gay marriage etc. 

Unfortunately these guys have the biggest voice in politics and academia, but they aren't representative of all Jews.

There are quite a few Libertarian Jews, Peter Schiff, Adam Kokesh; they don't all swing left.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> I work and live with Jews. They are deluded in the Northeast. I guess that's what happens in high finance and academia.


Lol.

----------


## amy31416

> The problem with Jews are the _radical_ leftist Jews. 
> 
> Those who believe in Keynesian economics, the welfare state, endless warfare and money for Israel, mass immigration. 
> 
> Unfortunately these guys have the biggest voice in politics in academia, but they aren't representative of all Jews by any means.


Mass immigration for countries other than Israel. And no, they're hardly a voice for most Jews....but as the neocons like to say in regards to the Muslims--"where are the dissenting voices?"

----------


## amy31416

> I work and live with Jews. They are deluded in the Northeast. I guess that's what happens in high finance and academia.


I have black friends!

----------


## AuH20

> I have black friends!


What the hell does that mean? Long Island contains one of the largest concentration of jews in the U.S. The five towns. Great Neck. Roslyn. Woodbury. Professionals and those in finance. You don't have to major in social science to arrive at what they view the proper role of government to be. Think Chuck Schumer and worse. Take the worse of the Republicans and then the democrats, and you have the average political stance of metropolitan New York jew.

----------


## Danke

> I have black friends!


Have you broken the news to Kludge?

----------


## lilymc

> Yeah. I am.
> 
> Live and let live. My gripe with Israel's government is that they steal from us and get us involved in massive warfare. I have absolutely no problem with their religion. You do.
> 
> As far as I know, Jesus wouldn't approve of the "modern" state of Israel. You do.


I never stated that I approved of the modern state of Israel, you are putting words in my mouth. And I didn't say that I disapproved.  Most of my posts were pointing out the one-sidedness from some people, who were talking about racism, hate, murder, while completely ignoring that the other side does the exact same thing, only worse.

Also, you didn't address what I said.  It is silly to say that someone is anti-semitic for saying that Jews are spiritually blind, because it is the BIBLE that says that.  And you also ignored that from a Christian perspective, ANYONE who rejects Jesus/God is spiritually blind.  That means Muslims too. And atheists, Hindus, etc, etc, etc.

I guess I touched a nerve with you.  But once again, saying someone is spiritually blind doesn't mean that you hate them.   Hating someone would be to NOT care about their spiritual condition.

----------


## specsaregood

> There are millions of American Jews, those are just a handful.  Have you ever met a Jew?


you live in KY, have you ever met one IRL?

----------


## Massachusetts

Yeah, so back to the actual topic at hand about Israel and the liberty movements perception of it. Enough of this religious bickering and racially motivated statements.

----------


## otherone

> I work and live with Jews. They are deluded in the Northeast. I guess that's what happens in high finance and academia.


I had a Jewish gf in college....early eighties.  Her dad was a shoe salesman...not a banker or an academic.  My last ltr was a Ukrainian Jew...massage therapist.  My current gf (fiancee) is Jewish.  She works in mental health.  She isn't Illuminati either (as far as I know).

----------


## acptulsa

> Yeah, so back to the actual topic at hand about Israel and the liberty movements perception of it. Enough of this religious bickering and racially motivated statements.


Is it even possible to talk about Israel and ignore religious bickering at the same time?

I'm afraid that if you take the subject of religious bickering completely off the table I can't claim that I know much of anything at all about Israel...

----------


## specsaregood

> I had a Jewish gf in college....early eighties.  Her dad was a shoe salesman...not a banker or an academic.  My last ltr was a Ukrainian Jew...massage therapist.  My current gf (fiancee) is Jewish.  She works in mental health.  She isn't Illuminati either (as far as I know).


I had a jewish pot dealer back in the 90's,  the bags were always light.

----------


## otherone

> Most of my posts were pointing out the one-sidedness from some people, who were talking about racism, hate, murder, while completely ignoring that the other side does the exact same thing, only worse.


What is worse than state-sanctioned murder?

----------


## amy31416

> What the hell does that mean? Long Island contains one of the largest concentration of jews in the U.S. The five towns. Great Neck. Roslyn. Woodbury. Professionals and those in finance. You don't have to major in social science to arrive at what they view the proper role of government to be. Think Chuck Schumer and worse. Take the worse of the Republicans and then the democrats, and you have the average political stance of metropolitan New York jew.


You know exactly what I mean. You aren't stupid.

----------


## Danke

> My last ltr was a Ukrainian Jew...massage therapist.


Still have her number?

----------


## otherone

> I had a jewish pot dealer back in the 90's,  the bags were always light.


...."a fool and his money"...

----------


## amy31416

> I never stated that I approved of the modern state of Israel, you are putting words in my mouth. And I didn't say that I disapproved.  Most of my posts were pointing out the one-sidedness from some people, who were talking about racism, hate, murder, while completely ignoring that the other side does the exact same thing, only worse.
> 
> Also, you didn't address what I said.  It is silly to say that someone is anti-semitic for saying that Jews are spiritually blind, because it is the BIBLE that says that.  And you also ignored that from a Christian perspective, ANYONE who rejects Jesus/God is spiritually blind.  That means Muslims too. And atheists, Hindus, etc, etc, etc.
> 
> I guess I touched a nerve with you.  But once again, saying someone is spiritually blind doesn't mean that you hate them.   Hating someone would be to NOT care about their spiritual condition.


So you don't approve of the modern state of Israel? Your approval of that state are the only words I "put in your mouth."

----------


## otherone

> Still have her number?


Is Nightmares a town in Pa?
(actually, it would be called "Nightmaresville", then)

----------


## AuH20

> You know exactly what I mean. You aren't stupid.


You are trying to insinuate that I woke up one day and decided that I didn't like American jews due to some sinister motive. No. It's largely derived from experience. Not bad people, but I wouldn't want to be in a foxhole with them.

----------


## specsaregood

> ...."a fool and his money"...


He got mad when I brought my own scale, so I started buying from a Mexican instead.  good hard working folk, he didn't mind if I brought my own scale.

----------


## Dr.3D

> He got mad when I brought my own scale, so I started buying from a Mexican instead.  good hard working folk, he didn't mind if I brought my own scale.


When I was in Mexico, both parties often brought their own scales.   Helped to keep folks honest.

Edit: Oops... reading back through the thread, I see mention of Pot.....   we were buying corn and selling meat with our scales.

----------


## amy31416

> You are trying to insinuate that I woke up one day and decided that I didn't like American jews due to some sinister motive. No. It's largely derived from experience. Not bad people, but I wouldn't want to be in a foxhole with them.


I honestly don't care if you don't like American Jews, I just think it's funny considering what you were defending.

----------


## otherone

> He got mad when I brought my own scale, so I started buying from a Mexican instead.  good hard working folk, he didn't mind if I brought my own scale.


LOL!
I knew a lazy mexican before, so I assumed they were ALL that way!

----------


## amy31416

> He got mad when I brought my own scale, so I started buying from a Mexican instead.  good hard working folk, he didn't mind if I brought my own scale.


Unlike many other Americans, I've never met a Mexican that I didn't like and respect. Which is why I have no understanding of the Mexican immigration issue--well that and because I'm a Yankee.

----------


## otherone

> You are trying to insinuate that I woke up one day and decided that I didn't like American jews due to some sinister motive. No. It's largely derived from experience. Not bad people, but I wouldn't want to be in a foxhole with them.



Dooooood....for reals?
At least say "Long Island Jews"....you really think you can characterize "AMERICAN Jews" based on your experience?

----------


## AuH20

> Dooooood....for reals?
> At least say "Long Island Jews"....you really think you can characterize "AMERICAN Jews" based on your experience?


Ok....Long Island jews. I assume the other pockets differ.

----------


## specsaregood

//

----------


## specsaregood

//

----------


## HOLLYWOOD

> I honestly don't care if you don't like American Jews, I just think it's funny considering what you were defending.

----------


## twomp

> Relax.  First of all, I absolutely do NOT hate all things Muslim, that is a lie.    Like I told you, I lived in a Muslim country, and I have good memories of the people, for the most part.  In fact, I have a heart for both Muslims and Jews.  And maybe (at some point) I would like to do missions work in a place where there are Muslims and Jews.
> 
> And for the second time, I don't watch any of the network news channels.  Nobody tells me what to think.  I am an independent thinker, and I'm more than able to come to a position, based on the things I have seen with my own eyes.
> 
> Of course not EVERY Muslim teaches their kids to hate Jews.  But to ignore that there is a hatred that is deeply woven into their society is to be willfully blind.
> 
> And what you aren't acknowledging is that there ARE extreme Muslims who not only teach their young kids to hate Jews, but teach that it's an honor to strap a bomb to yourself and blow up civilians.  This is not from "Fox News."   It's the reality that you are choosing to either disbelieve, or ignore.   The majority of palestinians support using terror as a tactic.  They use women and children for human shields.  Again, not Fox News, this is happening, whether you want to acknowledge it or not.
> 
> The only people I have sympathy for are the children, or the ones who truly DO want peace and do NOT support Hamas or using underhanded, evil tactics.  The problem is, the majority do not fit that description.
> ...


Yes, you are indoctrinated. You spew the same stuff out that the MSM does. I know this because I used to believe the same thing. Have you lived in Palestine? How do you know they use "women and children" as shields? Did you pull out your satellite and zoom in to find this out? Or did the MSM tell you? For someone who claims to be an "independent thinker", you sure sound like someone that's been brain washed. 

The "one-sideness" that you seem to be pointing out exists throughout the world. It's just that it doesn't exist here on these forums. Something you Israel firsters are trying to change. Please don't tell me again you aren't an Israel cheerleader, your words speak louder than your simple denials. It is equivalent to me saying, "black people are all freeloading criminals" then turning around and saying " but i'm not racist, i'm just pointing it out." 

I'm sorry m'am/sir. Your $#@! don't smell like roses. It smells like poo poo.

----------


## lilymc

> Yes, you are indoctrinated. You spew the same stuff out that the MSM does. I know this because I used to believe the same thing. Have you lived in Palestine? How do you know they use "women and children" as shields? Did you pull out your satellite and zoom in to find this out? Or did the MSM tell you? For someone who claims to be an "independent thinker", you sure sound like someone that's been brain washed. 
> 
> The "one-sideness" that you seem to be pointing out exists throughout the world. It's just that it doesn't exist here on these forums. Something you Israel firsters are trying to change. Please don't tell me again you aren't an Israel cheerleader, your words speak louder than your simple denials. It is equivalent to me saying, "black people are all freeloading criminals" then turning around and saying " but i'm not racist, i'm just pointing it out." 
> 
> I'm sorry m'am/sir. Your $#@! don't smell like roses. It smells like poo poo.


I can see now that you're an unreasonable person, at least on this issue. So I'm not going to waste any more time trying to have a discussion with you.

Here's some advice for you, for future debating.  Don't tell people what they believe, especially when you don't know them.  Don't tell people what their position is.  And when they clearly correct you, as I did, don't ignore what they say and continue to mischaracterize their position.  That is not only a bad way to debate or have a conversation with someone... but that type of closed minded unreasonableness speaks volumes about who is the indoctrinated one here.

----------


## twomp

> I can see now that you're an unreasonable person, at least on this issue. So I'm not going to waste any more time trying to have a discussion with you.
> 
> Here's some advice for you, for future debating.  Don't tell people what they believe, especially when you don't know them.  Don't tell people what their position is.  And when they clearly correct you, as I did, don't ignore what they say and continue to mischaracterize their position.  That is not only a bad way to debate or have a conversation with someone... but that type of closed minded unreasonableness speaks volumes about who is the indoctrinated one here.


Thanks for telling me what to do then hide it under the disguise of "advice". You are the one being unreasonable. You believe what the majority of the world believes and you seek to enter these forums and have it think the way you do as well. I hope you are able to open your eyes one day.

----------


## ibaghdadi

> The Palestinians, until their relatively recent PR stunt, always considered themselves members of Syria and Egypt. I'm no fan of the zionists but people are blind to the facts:


Let a Palestinian whose family have lived in Jaffa to (at least) the seventh generation answer this.

Two words: BULL. $#@!.

Before the "nationalism" era, Palestinians considered themselves to belong to their respective cities. When asked, they'd say "I'm Yafawi" (from Jaffa), "We're Maqdisis" (from Jerusalem), "We're Safadis" (from Safad) etc.

No, we did not consider ourselves Syrians or Egyptians. This is complete, utter, stinking BS.

Since nationalism (late 19th/early 20th century) we have considered ourselves Palestinians.

Also, it's besides the point since the fact that we never had sovereignty (Turkish, then British, then Israeli occupation) doesn't change the fact that we existed in that land for many, many generations.

(BTW, it really amazes me that some people regularly come back to positions that educated, articulate Zionist Israeli Jews no longer push because they know it's bull$#@!. This is one of these positions.)

----------


## ibaghdadi

> But the point is that there is not a distinct Palestine people. There never has been one. It's a myth. Palestine was a location and a largely uninhabited one at that due to swampland. Both sides lie their ass off so as to conjure sympathy for their causes. This is no different.


Wow. Seems my grandparents were swamp dwellers. That would be a nice conversation opener the next time I speak to my grandmom.

----------


## ibaghdadi

> How many of you here have lived in, or even visited a Muslim country?   How many of you have been to Israel?


Allow me to answer your post starting from the last question (which you said wasn't rhetorical.) I've lived all my life in the Middle East and have never stepped foot in a non-Muslim country. My father was born in Jaffa (which is now a suburb of Tel Aviv) but we can't go back there because we're Palestinian. We've basically been refugees all our lives.




> Hello????  Am I in the twilight zone here, or what?  If you don't realize how extreme the Muslim hatred is against Jews, and how they are raised to hate Jews with a passion, and how they do NOT want peace, they want all Jews dead..... then you guys are either willfully blind, or woefully misinformed.


OK, so here's the thing. I am (a) Muslim; (b) Palestinian; (c) a lifelong refugee. And I (a) Do not hate Jews; (b) Do not want all the Jews dead; (c) Do want peace.




> you better talk about the Muslim extreme hatred, to the point of being diabolical. And how they teach their kids from the youngest age that Jews should die, and how they DON'T want peace. They never have. They have always wanted Jews dead, or out of the Middle East.


My mom (and grandmom) never told me at any age that Jews should die, and speaking on behalf of most Palestinians (being victims of war for generations), we do want peace. We just don't want a peace that is called "peace" but is really just an improvement in the conditions of our subjugation.




> If you're going to talk about institutional racism, then talk about how in certain Muslim countries (like Saudi Arabia) Jews aren't allowed to live there...


You're correct to criticize Saudi Arabia (and the lack of freedom of religion in nearly all Muslim countries). However you should note that we Muslims are the first victims of these regimes, and that the US government funds many of them and considers many of them to be allies.

So while you're right in saying that the actions of the Israeli government does not reflect all Israelis (let alone all Jews), it should also follow that the actions of the governments of Muslim-majority countries does not reflect all Muslims.


*Now:* Do we have a Jewish hatred problem in the (Muslim) Middle East? We absolutely do and anyone who denies that is being disingenuous or willfully blind. And many of us - as young activists - have been working very hard to expose and counter that rhetoric (and we're in the line of fire, mind you, not half a globe away).

However, do realize that the actions of the state of Israel makes our task very hard indeed. It's difficult to present a balanced view - that Jews belong in the Middle East and have lived among us for centuries, that Israel's war crimes and its brutal occupation does not reflect the true ethics of Judaism, etc - it's difficult to push this narrative when Israel's crimes are screaming much louder than we ever could.

But we persevere. No offense, but to most people who would read this, this is a very distant crisis that won't affect your lives immediately in any way. But for us, this is real. This is here & now. This is our life.

----------


## Danke

> Is Nightmares a town in Pa?
> (actually, it would be called "Nightmaresville", then)


You are evading the question,  Yes or No.

----------


## Danke

> How many of you here have lived in, or even visited a Muslim country?   How many of you have been to Israel?
> 
> That's not a rhetorical question, I honestly want to know.





> Spent a fair amount of time in Turkey and been to Israel twice on military exercises.


I answered your question, no response?

----------


## otherone

> You are evading the question,  Yes or No.


Yes.

----------


## robert68

> It's been a while since I posted here - nothing's changed. But I chose this thread to interject a thought which I haven't seen discussed. 
> 
> It's a given that, as policy, the U.S. should follow a foreign policy of non-interventionism. But it's also commonly commented upon that our interference in the middle-east is the reason behind the anti-Americanism and the hostility held by Muslim extremists toward the U.S.; and if we would only stop intervening, then this anomosity would gradually dissipate.
> 
> But is this an accurate assessment?
> 
> If you are truly libertarian, then you believe in free trade. And American arms manufacturers would have the freedom to deal with Israel. Or would you use the force of government to prohibit this commerce?
> 
> And if Americans, as individuals, continued to support Israel, would the terrorism, or the potential for terrorism, against Americans slacken? And what would be your response if we were attacked on American soil? Of course, we could continue to tighten our border security to insure that such an attack didn't occur, but at what cost to our nation?


One assumption in your argument is that with a non-interventionist US foreign policy, the state of Israel would be able to survive. There are around 9 million Palestinians in and near historic Palestine, and between 5 and 6 million Israelis there. Firstly, Israel has never gone without western military and financial backing. Secondly, the Palestinians are weak and defenseless against the state of Israel, their tormentors and occupier, precisely because of US intervention in the region.

 It only took a few hundred Hezbollah fighters with some hi-tech defensive weapons to stop Israels invasion of Lebanon a few years ago. Its US intervention in Jordan (2/3 Palestinian), Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, the Mediterranean Sea, Turkey, Iraq, and its enormous support for the state of Israel, that prevents millions of Palestinians from having hi-tech weapons and waging a successful guerrilla war against the occupiers of their land.  

No economy stays afloat in war, and even the expectation of an unending guerrilla war with millions of Palestinians would tank Israels economy, over night. Palestinians have nothing to lose in fighting their occupiers, the state of Israel; they already have a low standard of living and no rights on their native land. Israelis on the other hand, live 1st world comfortable with all the rights, and the loss of that 1st world comfort, will cause many Israelis to grab those passports for other countries that theyve maintained for an emergency, head to the airport and leave. As this all continues, many Israeli soldiers, knowing Israel is all alone in this unending struggle, would desert in increasing numbers. Eventually Israel, the settler colony/apartheid Jewish state in historic Palestine, would go the way East Germany did.

----------


## lilymc

> I answered your question, no response?


Thanks for your reply.  I was just curious.   I see a lot of people (especially young people) who have very strong opinions, but the way they portray it goes against what I saw when I was in the Middle East.   And it goes against what some other people I know (from another discussion forum) who actually live in Israel have to say.

----------


## Tywysog Cymru

> you live in KY, have you ever met one IRL?


Several, all from Louisville though, I can't think of any Jews who went to my high school 15 minutes away from the city.  My mother used to work with a lot of Jews before I was born and my parents lived in Louisville.

They're nice people from my experiences, and mostly similar to everyone else.

----------


## Number19

> Allow me to answer your post starting from the last question (which you said wasn't rhetorical.) I've lived all my life in the Middle East and have never stepped foot in a non-Muslim country. My father was born in Jaffa (which is now a suburb of Tel Aviv) but we can't go back there because we're Palestinian. We've basically been refugees all our lives.
> 
> 
> OK, so here's the thing. I am (a) Muslim; (b) Palestinian; (c) a lifelong refugee. And I (a) Do not hate Jews; (b) Do not want all the Jews dead; (c) Do want peace.
> 
> 
> My mom (and grandmom) never told me at any age that Jews should die, and speaking on behalf of most Palestinians (being victims of war for generations), we do want peace. We just don't want a peace that is called "peace" but is really just an improvement in the conditions of our subjugation.
> 
> 
> ...


Excellent commentary. Greatly appreciated.

First, the contrarian comment. I don't recognize as legitimate any claim of "war crimes". War is hell. And has been throughout history. It's purpose is to kill and to keep killing until you win. In WW2, the Japanese did not surrender until we had nuked the civilian populations of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Claims of "excessive force" and "disproportionality" by the Israelis are laughable. Also, statements by U.N. spokesmen that Israel needs "to respect its obligations under international law" hold no standing in my eyes as the U.N. has no standing.

You're Palestinian advocating for peace. I've asked this question elsewhere, but I'll ask again : What would be an acceptable solution by Palestinians to advance a peaceful solution to the problems of the middle-east?

----------


## Number19

> One assumption in your argument is that with a non-interventionist US foreign policy, the state of Israel would be able to survive. There are around 9 million Palestinians in and near historic Palestine, and between 5 and 6 million Israelis there. Firstly, Israel has never gone without western military and financial backing. Secondly, the Palestinians are weak and defenseless against the state of Israel, their tormentors and occupier, precisely because of US intervention in the region.
> 
>  It only took a few hundred Hezbollah fighters with some hi-tech defensive weapons to stop Israel’s invasion of Lebanon a few years ago. It’s US intervention in Jordan (2/3 Palestinian), Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, the Mediterranean Sea, Turkey, Iraq, and it’s enormous support for the state of Israel, that prevents millions of Palestinians from having hi-tech weapons and waging a successful guerrilla war against the occupiers of their land.  
> 
> No economy stays afloat in war, and even the expectation of an unending guerrilla war with millions of Palestinians would tank Israel’s economy, over night. Palestinians have nothing to lose in fighting their occupiers, the state of Israel; they already have a low standard of living and no rights on their native land. Israeli’s on the other hand, live 1st world comfortable with all the rights, and the loss of that 1st world comfort, will cause many Israeli’s to grab those passports for other countries that they’ve maintained for an emergency, head to the airport and leave. As this all continues, many Israeli soldiers, knowing Israel is all alone in this unending struggle, would desert in increasing numbers. Eventually Israel, the settler colony/apartheid Jewish state in historic Palestine, would go the way East Germany did.


I appreciate your reasoned response.

But, in my opinion, what you are not taking into account in your assessment of a non-interventionist American policy, is that this would result in a paradigm shift in military strategy. Confronted with a military threat such as you describe, short term, this would result in an all out defensive strategy more intense than the six day war, resulting in the total decimation of Gaza and tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of deaths. Longer term, if the entire middle-east were to unite against Israel, this would almost certainly result in the use of nuclear weapons and the death of millions. You seem to believe that Israel would quietly accept defeat; I think, when faced with a national threat to their existence, Israel would unite.  

My question is : Is the use of nuclear weapons and the total obliteration of the middle-east acceptable to you? And, as libertarians, do we have a responsibility to help prevent such an apocalypse, keeping in mind the fallout which would spread around the world?

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> I appreciate your reasoned response.
> 
> But, in my opinion, what you are not taking into account in your assessment of a non-interventionist American policy, is that this would result in a paradigm shift in military strategy. Confronted with a military threat such as you describe, short term, this would result in an all out defensive strategy more intense than the six day war, resulting in the total decimation of Gaza and tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of deaths. Longer term, if the entire middle-east were to unite against Israel, this would almost certainly result in the use of nuclear weapons and the death of millions. You seem to believe that Israel would quietly accept defeat; I think, when faced with a national threat to their existence, Israel would unite.  
> 
> My question is : Is the use of nuclear weapons and the total obliteration of the middle-east acceptable to you? And, as libertarians, do we have a responsibility to help prevent such an apocalypse, keeping in mind the fallout which would spread around the world?


Your question is a loaded one. Incredibly so, at that. So what are the options, as you propose? We either unconditionally and eternally supply Israel with foreign aid and military assistance, or Gaza will be destroyed entirely, instead of simply the amount that it is being destroyed today, and the Middle East obliterated with nuclear fallout affecting the entire world.

What sort of response do you expect?

One, Israel could defend itself. Two, they aren't the only country in the region with nuclear arms. Three, they aren't particularly suicidal. Four, it isn't our concern. And five, if you wish to defend Israel the honorable thing to do would be to go there. Yourself. Not to take money from all or use political means to send other's children there. I doubt Bill Kristol is ever going to take up arms for Israel.

----------


## Number19

> Your question is a loaded one. Incredibly so, at that. So what are the options, as you propose? We either unconditionally and eternally supply Israel with foreign aid and military assistance, or Gaza will be destroyed entirely, instead of simply the amount that it is being destroyed today, and the Middle East obliterated with nuclear fallout affecting the entire world.
> 
> What sort of response do you expect?
> 
> One, Israel could defend itself. Two, they aren't the only country in the region with nuclear arms. Three, they aren't particularly suicidal. Four, it isn't our concern. And five, if you wish to defend Israel the honorable thing to do would be to go there. Yourself. Not to take money from all or use political means to send other's children there. I doubt Bill Kristol is ever going to take up arms for Israel.


I've stated previously that I support a policy of non-intervention. But one must reasonably recognize that decisions have consequences and withdrawing American support increases the risk significantly that nuclear weapons will be used in the middle-east.

The best solution I can come up with is for control of Gaza to be assumed by an international tribunal & police force, for a period of not less than 50 years, and with all other rights being guaranteed for the Palestinian citizens.

Helping to negotiate such a solution, acceptable to all parties, would not violate my libertarian principles. But I don't think this solution would be acceptable to the Muslim extremists.

----------


## pcosmar

> I've stated previously that I support a policy of non-intervention.


So do I,, but I have never seen one.
It is not a reality.. but it is a very nice fantasy.

As it is,, I personally do not support the invasion of Palestine by the Zionists.



> Thus says the Lord GOD, "It will come about on that day, that thoughts will come into your mind and you will devise an evil plan, and you will say, 'I will go up against the land of unwalled villages. I will go against those who are at rest, that live securely, all of them living without walls and having no bars or gates, to capture spoil and to seize plunder, to turn your hand against the waste places which are now inhabited, and against the people who are gathered from the nations, who have acquired cattle and goods, who live at the center of the world.'

----------


## jjdoyle

> But one must reasonably recognize that decisions have consequences and withdrawing American support increases the risk significantly that nuclear weapons will be used in the middle-east.


What is this based on? I'm guessing since "one must reasonably recognize", you have something to back this up?
I would say WITH American support the risk of nuclear weapons being used in the Middle East, INCREASES significantly.
I'm just basing that on the history of nations that have used nuclear weapons in a time of war....

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> I've stated previously that I support a policy of non-intervention. But one must reasonably recognize that decisions have consequences and withdrawing American support increases the risk significantly that nuclear weapons will be used in the middle-east.
> 
> The best solution I can come up with is for control of Gaza to be assumed by an international tribunal & police force, for a period of not less than 50 years, and with all other rights being guaranteed for the Palestinian citizens.
> 
> Helping to negotiate such a solution, acceptable to all parties, would not violate my libertarian principles. But I don't think this solution would be acceptable to the Muslim extremists.


Is this a joke?

----------


## robert68

> I appreciate your reasoned response.
> 
> But, in my opinion, what you are not taking into account in your assessment of a non-interventionist American policy, is that this would result in a paradigm shift in military strategy. Confronted with a military threat such as you describe, short term, this would result in an all out defensive strategy more intense than the six day war, resulting in the total decimation of Gaza and tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of deaths. Longer term, if the entire middle-east were to unite against Israel, this would almost certainly result in the use of nuclear weapons and the death of millions. You seem to believe that Israel would quietly accept defeat; I think, when faced with a national threat to their existence, Israel would unite.  
> 
> My question is : Is the use of nuclear weapons and the total obliteration of the middle-east acceptable to you? And, as libertarians, do we have a responsibility to help prevent such an apocalypse, keeping in mind the fallout which would spread around the world?



I wasn’t trying to suggest all the states of the Middle East would unite against Israel, but that the states mentioned just wouldn’t be doing Israel any favors like they are now, in preventing the Palestinians from getting hi-tech weapons, from wherever (like Hezbollah did), maybe even Russian made. And Israel’s nukes will be useless against the Palestinians. 

Israel needs international legitimacy for many things. It won’t be able to just nuke every country it wants that isn’t cowing to its every wish, and do whatever it wants to the Palestinians, and retain that legitimacy, especially without the US government covering for it at the UN.

Also, in 1967, Israel had the benefit of French, British, German, and US intervention on their behalf, both directly to them, and in the region, especially in Britain's backing of the Kingdom of Jordan. In 1973, Israel’s survival required the US to become their main military and financial backer, and it’s been that way ever since. Israel's never survived alone.

----------


## Number19

> Is this a joke?


No and I don't understand why you would think it so. It lacks detail, which can be negotiated, but it has at it's core the guarantee of Israeli security by an international force. It lifts the blockade and gives Palestinians all rights except self determination. Palestinians would thrive under such an arrangement. It's a win - win for everyone.

----------


## Number19

> ...And Israel’s nukes will be useless against the Palestinians...


Why? I'm assuming you are thinking "bombs" and forgetting about tactical nuclear weapons which are artillery shells intended for use on the battlefield. But Israel would only resort to nukes if its existence was threatened. Given your previous scenario, dealing with Gaza would be a conventional war on steroids.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> No and I don't understand why you would think it so. It lacks detail, which can be negotiated, but it has at it's core the guarantee of Israeli security by an international force. It lifts the blockade and gives Palestinians all rights except self determination. Palestinians would thrive under such an arrangement. It's a win - win for everyone.


It isn't a win for anyone aside from the contractors tasked with imposing said 50 year police state. It would do nothing to pacify those whose main issue is the meddling in their affairs.

I'm just a little at a loss for words, is all. 

Your post bleeds of preemptive warfare justifications, doesn't address the real issue, violates rights, entangles American interests... I mean, I'm having a rather hard time seeing a positive in it.

----------


## Number19

> What is this based on? I'm guessing since "one must reasonably recognize", you have something to back this up?
> I would say WITH American support the risk of nuclear weapons being used in the Middle East, INCREASES significantly.
> I'm just basing that on the history of nations that have used nuclear weapons in a time of war....


One is history. Israel was close to using nuclear weapons during the six day war, but gained the upper hand and didn't have to. But the general thought is that, pressed to the edge and about to face defeat, Israel will use their full capabilities to defend their nation. If we withdraw our support and Israel were ever again to face a multi-nation attack, there is increased risk that this may occur.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> One is history. Israel was close to using nuclear weapons during the six day war, but gained the upper hand and didn't have to. But the general thought is that, pressed to the edge and about to face defeat, Israel will use their full capabilities to defend their nation. If we withdraw our support and Israel were ever again to face a multi-nation attack, there is increased risk that this may occur.


Then there is an increased chance Israel will turn to glass.

How or why this nation ever provided them an inkling of support with regards to nuclear technology is beyond me.

----------


## pcosmar

> One is history. Israel was close to using nuclear weapons during the six day war, but gained the upper hand and didn't have to. But the general thought is that, pressed to the edge and about to face defeat, Israel will use their full capabilities to defend their nation. If we withdraw our support and Israel were ever again to face a multi-nation attack, there is increased risk that this may occur.


And after they irradiate their own land (fallout) where do the move to next?

Utter stupidity.

----------


## Number19

> It isn't a win for anyone aside from the contractors tasked with imposing said 50 year police state. It would do nothing to pacify those whose main issue is the meddling in their affairs.
> 
> I'm just a little at a loss for words, is all. 
> 
> Your post bleeds of preemptive warfare justifications, doesn't address the real issue, violates rights, entangles American interests... I mean, I'm having a rather hard time seeing a positive in it.


I agree that the solution will not be accepted and I said so in post #196. But no one else has advanced a solution. And if no solution is acceptable, then the war continues and the deaths continues and the same posters will be attacking Israel for the tragedy of the war.

----------


## Number19

> Then there is an increased chance Israel will turn to glass.
> 
> How or why this nation ever provided them an inkling of support with regards to nuclear technology is beyond me.


We don't know their full capability. There is neutron technology.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> I agree that the solution will not be accepted and I said so in post #196. But no one else has advanced a solution. And if no solution is acceptable, then the war continues and the deaths continues and the same posters will be attacking Israel for the tragedy of the war.


I am "attacking" Israel for our support.

The solution would be to cut off aid. Immediately and vocally so.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> We don't know their full capability. There is neutron technology.


I don't give one goddamn about their capability.

What, is Israel holding the world hostage?

$#@! them. And $#@! their neutron technology.

----------


## robert68

> Why? I'm assuming you are thinking "bombs" and forgetting about tactical nuclear weapons which are artillery shells intended for use on the battlefield. But Israel would only resort to nukes if its existence was threatened. Given your previous scenario, dealing with Gaza would be a conventional war on steroids.


Do to the geographic size of Israel, and its location, I see a significant drop in foreign investment in Israel’s economy, from any significant diminishment of a non-interventionist US foreign policy in the region. Just going back to 1993 when the Oslo Accords were signed, Israel’s GDP was a fraction of what it is today, but that increased US intervention caused the GDP to spike. And as I said originally, a good many Israeli’s aren’t going to live in Israel with an increasingly lower standard of living. The targeting of oil refineries in Israel, alone, would have grave consequences to Israel’s economy. And using tact nukes or whatever against vast numbers of Palestinians is only going to cause foreign investment to go down further, IMO. 




> No and I don't understand why you would think it so. It lacks detail, which can be negotiated, but it has at it's core the guarantee of Israeli security by an international force. It lifts the blockade and gives Palestinians all rights except self determination. Palestinians would thrive under such an arrangement. It's a win - win for everyone.


Not remotely. That reminds me of the claim made when the Oslo Accords were signed, that the West Bank and Gaza would become the "Singapore of the Middle East". What it did was make the lives of the Palestinians on the West Bank and Gaza worse, from the beginning. And the refugees elsewhere were just blown off, like you did them here.

----------


## Number19

> Do to the geographic size of Israel, and its location, I see a significant drop in foreign investment in Israels economy, from any significant diminishment of a non-interventionist US foreign policy in the region. Just going back to 1993 when the Oslo Accords were signed, Israels GDP was a fraction of what it is today, but that increased US intervention caused the GDP to spike. And as I said originally, a good many Israelis arent going to live in Israel with an increasingly lower standard of living. The targeting of oil refineries in Israel, alone, would have grave consequences to Israels economy. And using tact nukes or whatever against vast numbers of Palestinians is only going to cause foreign investment to go down further, IMO. 
> 
> 
> 
> Not remotely. That reminds me of the claim made when the Oslo Accords were signed, that the West Bank and Gaza would become the "Singapore of the Middle East". What it did was make the lives of the Palestinians on the West Bank and Gaza worse, from the beginning. And the refugees elsewhere were just blown off, like you did them here.


You continue to be one who has given some thought to the consequences of a changed foreign policy; and I tend to agree that Israel's economy would suffer with the withdrawal of U.S. support. I also agree that numbers of Israelis would leave.

But now, what you have remaining is an entrenchment of the hardcore nationalists supported by a war economy and from abroad.

It is from this point - an Israel under siege - than I am concerned.

Now, kcchiefs6465, says he doesn't give a "$#@!" what happens. If nuclear fallout drifts over Europe, or drifts east toward India and China, he doesn't care.

Who would have thought that the assassination of an Austrian archduke would have triggered WW1? What would be the unintended consequences of an Israel under siege? Should we care?

The past can't be undone. A solution can only come by going forward from today. The negotiation of this solution is what interests me.

----------


## ibaghdadi

> You're Palestinian advocating for peace. I've asked this question elsewhere, but I'll ask again : What would be an acceptable solution by Palestinians to advance a peaceful solution to the problems of the middle-east?


I think I'll quote a reply I sent an Israeli FB friend. He had reached out to me shortly after the Arab Spring, three years ago. Note that this isn't empty rhetoric, it's a Palestinian refugee talking to an Israeli of his age & generation.




> _For me and for many like me, a one state solution is the only answer. Arabs and Israelis may have a lot of differences but share one thing above all - deep and undying love for this land. This land does something to us, Arad. It's "holy" for a reason. Third- and fourth-generation Palestinians still sing its praise and dream of the day of return, just like generations of Jews in diaspora dreamed of the day.
> 
> The only way we can prevent a cyclical tragedy of displacement and diaspora is to learn to live together and share the land that we love so much. I can never accept that Jaffa isn't my home, much like many Israelis cannot accept that it isn't theirs either. A two state solution, in my opinion, will simply sow the seeds for new tragedies on both sides to be suffered either by us or by our children or their children. It's a solution built not upon true reconciliation but upon big-power politics maintaining a fragile and grudging truce.
> 
> I know how the one-state solution is viewed in Israel. I personally see most criticisms as based on prejudice and pure laziness.
> 
> It's prejudiced to assume that Palestinian Arab Muslims like myself cannot understand or accept democracy & human rights, and it is lazy to assume that we can have peace without talking through the collective trauma we've inflicted upon each other, or having a good hard look at some of the choices our political elite has made for us those past 100 years.
> 
> Peace will not be achieved with the same thinking that plagued the generation of our fathers, Arad. It needs a new thinking for a new generation and a new world._


Note that an increasing number of people on both sides are starting to realize that it's far too late for a two-state solution, because there's simply no space left for a Palestinian state. But at the same time, a majority of Isareli Jews are against a one-state solution, even as they realize that the status quo is unsustainable (militarily, morally, demographically, and politically).

----------


## otherone

> One is history.* The government of* Israel was close to using nuclear weapons during the six day war, but gained the upper hand and didn't have to. But the general thought is that, pressed to the edge and about to face defeat, the *government of* Israel will use their full capabilities to defend their nation*al government*. If we *The US government* withdraws our their support and *the government of* Israel were ever again to face a multi-nation attack *on their oligarchy*, there is increased risk that this may occur.


fify.

----------


## Number19

> I think I'll quote a reply I sent an Israeli FB friend. He had reached out to me shortly after the Arab Spring, three years ago. Note that this isn't empty rhetoric, it's a Palestinian refugee talking to an Israeli of his age & generation.
> 
> 
> 
> Note that an increasing number of people on both sides are starting to realize that it's far too late for a two-state solution, because there's simply no space left for a Palestinian state. But at the same time, a majority of Isareli Jews are against a one-state solution, even as they realize that the status quo is unsustainable (militarily, morally, demographically, and politically).


You have the right idea, but it can only work if the government of the one-state solution is secular. This will be hard.

I can remember back when Lebanon was a secular, and I believe, democratic nation and was extremely prosperous. It was a holiday/vacation retreat, and financial center, on the Mediterranean with tourists visiting from all over the world - the Switzerland of the Middle East. Between 1943 and 1975 they had a unique power sharing political system known as "confessionalism", until the 1975-1990 civil war brought it down.

If properly approached, and with a strong constitution, your idea has the same opportunity for eventual acceptance by a good percentage of both Israelis and Palestinians. Israel is a democracy and with the majority of its population accepting such a solution, the others can be obliged to follow. This will not be easy; but in my opinion, persuading militant Muslims will be much more difficult. They brought Lebanon down and I don't think they will allow your idea to succeed.

Your job, and others who believe as you do, will be to bring together the nucleus of a constitution, and its rule of law, which will make it happen. You have to have this plan already formulated before you can begin to sell the idea.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> You continue to be one who has given some thought to the consequences of a changed foreign policy; and I tend to agree that Israel's economy would suffer with the withdrawal of U.S. support. I also agree that numbers of Israelis would leave.
> 
> But now, what you have remaining is an entrenchment of the hardcore nationalists supported by a war economy and from abroad.
> 
> It is from this point - an Israel under siege - than I am concerned.
> 
> Now, kcchiefs6465, says he doesn't give a "$#@!" what happens. If nuclear fallout drifts over Europe, or drifts east toward India and China, he doesn't care.
> 
> Who would have thought that the assassination of an Austrian archduke would have triggered WW1? What would be the unintended consequences of an Israel under siege? Should we care?
> ...


Who would have thought blind American patriotism, nationalist propaganda, and a flawed moral code would have entangled America in a devastating war.

It's almost like.... times haven't changed.

----------


## pcosmar

> The negotiation of this solution is what interests me.


There will be NO solution negotiated.
The solution happens at the end of the book,, when Christ returns..
And defeats the inhabitants of  Jerusalem.

It will only get worse till then.

The whole purpose of creating the (Zionist) State of Israel was to put the Anti-Christ on the throne there.
And that is going according to plan.

It is there to provoke the third World War.

----------


## Massachusetts

I'm willing to admit I am wrong on this issue. Israel, from my vantage point, has committed war crimes. It has become very clear since I originally posted this thread.

One thing I want to make clear though. From the very beginning, *I have opposed foreign aid to Israel* and to any other country for that matter. Israel has one of the most powerful militaries in the world and they do not need nor are they entitled to U.S. taxpayer dollars. It is my sense that a lot of the angst towards Israel is because of our foreign aid, but in a sense this was the entire point I made in this thread. The anger should be towards our politicians for allowing this farce to continue for so long.

However, I have seen some posts in here attacking Jewish people that have disappointed me to say the least. I hope the folks who made those comments will admit they are wrong as well.

----------


## Number19

> I'm willing to admit I am wrong on this issue. Israel, from my vantage point, has committed war crimes. It has become very clear since I originally posted this thread...


What "war crimes", precisely; and under what jurisdiction are these judged to be war crimes?

The deaths of civilians, and children in particular?

Israel is not singling out and targeting these individuals. These deaths are what you would call collateral damage. Plus, there might be the occasional error. But if these are war crimes, then the U.S. commits war crimes on a regular basis with their drone attacks. And all nations which fight a war commit war crimes.

Using the description "war crimes" is merely a PR tactic to gain public sympathy. If you live by the sword then you must accept the fact that there will be civilian casualties. War is hell.

----------


## Number19

To further support my comments on the nature of war and "war crimes", we have another thread on this forum titled "Slaughterhouse: Civilians die in Kiev's ruthless military attacks". These attacks are being supported not only by the U.S., but also by the NATO nations of the EU. What are absent, in the news media and from the U.N., are accusations of "war crimes". The Obama administration is trying to stop the killing in Gaza, but continue to send military supplies to Kiev.

One might justifiably condemn the act of war but not for "war crimes". War is hell.

----------


## HVACTech

> There will be NO solution negotiated.
> The solution happens at the end of the book,, when Christ returns..
> And defeats the inhabitants of  Jerusalem.
> 
> It will only get worse till then.
> 
> The whole purpose of creating the (Zionist) State of Israel was to put the Anti-Christ on the throne there.
> And that is going according to plan.
> 
> It is there to provoke the third World War.


interesting... if negative take on the subject. 
I have been wondering here lately myself, when Israel was "created" in 1948, why did they leave a small pocket of the dispossessed?
I mean, if you are going to boot people off of land, that they have occupied for around 2000 years.
to "create" a place for another dispossessed group....
leaving a small pocket for the "locals" is just asking for trouble.
what a frickin mess.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> To further support my comments on the nature of war and "war crimes", we have another thread on this forum titled "Slaughterhouse: Civilians die in Kiev's ruthless military attacks". These attacks are being supported not only by the U.S., but also by the NATO nations of the EU. What are absent, in the news media and from the U.N., are accusations of "war crimes". The Obama administration is trying to stop the killing in Gaza, but continue to send military supplies to Kiev.
> 
> One might justifiably condemn the act of war but not for "war crimes". War is hell.


There are legitimate targets in war. There are legitimate just wars. There are actions that step outside the boundaries of both. These would be considered war crimes. The conventions signed and generally adhered to, on the usage of cluster bomb munitions, for example, or various gases, or the restriction of certain types of ammunition and the condemnation of certain atrocities as war crimes is not some cliche bull$#@! such as, "War is hell" but is indeed founded upon sound legal theory and treaties. War is hell, alright-- I'm told, by the particularly ignorant and most ardent supporters of war. It's almost as if the cognitive dissonance and life long indoctrination in propaganda has had quite the effect. The mind can't often look at the mangled corpses of children, defend those actions, and recognize their culpability. So we get tired cliches of war is hell and the general attempt to blame the victims for their eviscerated fate.

And the Obama administration is full of war criminals themselves. They aren't trying to do $#@!.

----------


## pcosmar

> interesting... if negative take on the subject. 
> I have been wondering here lately myself, when Israel was "created" in 1948, why did they leave a small pocket of the dispossessed?
> I mean, if you are going to boot people off of land, that they have occupied for around 2000 years.
> to "create" a place for another dispossessed group....
> leaving a small pocket for the "locals" is just asking for trouble.
> what a frickin mess.


This was planned long before Zionism was even created,, Zionism was created for the purpose. 



> "The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the "agentur" of the "Illuminati" between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other. Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustionWe shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil. Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view. This manifestation will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time."


Zionism has nothing to do with Judaism. It has nothing to do with the "Jews",, but uses them as pawns.

Whether you believe it or not is irrelevant. 
Watch and see.

Oh,, and BTW,,I am not antisemitic. I do not hate  Jews.. in fact, I have a bit of affinity for that family line.
I do oppose those that sully the name. 
Zionism was created by atheists,, of questionable lineage. They were not Jews.

----------


## HVACTech

> This was planned long before Zionism was even created,, Zionism was created for the purpose. 
> 
> 
> Zionism has nothing to do with Judaism. It has nothing to do with the "Jews",, but uses them as pawns.
> 
> Whether you believe it or not is irrelevant. 
> Watch and see.
> 
> Oh,, and BTW,,I am not antisemitic. I do not hate  Jews.. in fact, I have a bit of affinity for that family line.
> ...


the way I see it, as an American, I am duty bound to respect all religions. 
as a Deist, I do not have a dog in this fight. 




> whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration


whew! that was some heavy duty stuff you posted....

today, we live in a world awash with information. hell, I did not even know what a Deist was back in 07. 

I believe it is necessary to understand the basic premise, of all the faiths based on Abraham....
to be able to develop a clear picture.
something fishy is going on..
peace.

----------


## willwash

> I have observed many debates on foreign policy on RPF, DP, and countless other liberty-oriented sites. A trend I have noticed is the anti-Israel sentiments and the downright hatred of Israel.
> 
> Many in the liberty movement are so off on this issue for a few reasons:
> 
> 1) Israel is our strongest ally in the part of the world where folks are the most hostile toward the United States. The United States has spent a long time playing Russian Roulette with countries in the Middle East (i.e. arming ISIS in Syria, and fighting against them in Iraq)..but Israel has *almost always been our ally.
> 
> 2) The anger is directed towards Israel as if they are our enemy. You can disagree with actions that Israel takes in terms of military strategy without expressing hatred of Israel and their people.
> 
> 3) The power of the AIPAC lobby - just like liberals broadly lump in all gun owners in with the NRA, it is unfair to broadly lump all the folks in Israel with AIPAC. The anger should be dedicated towards the politicians who allow AIPAC to have such a heavy influence on their decision making when it comes to foreign policy - not Israel.
> ...


1). It is precisely because of Israel that these nations don't like us.  You are putting the cart before the horse.  As to Israel being our ally, I have one word:   USS Liberty

2). Not according to the zio fascist ADL and many others.  Norman Finkelstein had the audacity to criticize Israel's intentional exploitation of holocaust history for national gain and for this "crime" not only was he labeled a holocaust denier, but his career as an academic was derailed due to Jewish pressure on DePaul university. 

3). Where do you think Aipac takes it's marching orders?  Tomorrow in Jerusalem, right?

4). See number 3

----------


## Number19

The modern concept of war crimes originated with the idea that a new world order could be created. Atrocities are committed during war, but the idea we need a world body to control and govern nations, and mankind, is more abhorrent to my libertarian consciousness.

----------


## Number19

> 1). It is precisely because of Israel that these nations don't like us.


This is not entirely correct. The Muslim jihadi movement would force Islam on all nations. They hate everything not Islamic.

----------


## pcosmar

> The modern concept of war crimes originated with the idea that a new world order could be created. .


NO. It did not.
The concept of War Crimes has been around much longer.(1400s) Long before the Geneva convention.

And the Geneva Conventions were before the creation of the League of Nations.




> The Hague Conventions were international treaties negotiated at the First and Second Peace Conferences at The Hague, Netherlands, in 1899 and 1907, respectively, and were, along with the Geneva Conventions, among the first formal statements of the laws of war and war crimes in the nascent body of secular international law.

----------


## pcosmar

> This is not entirely correct. The Muslim jihadi movement would force Islam on all nations. They hate everything not Islamic.


The Jihadi Movement is a creation of the CIA,
They Radicalized Islam (Twisted it) to recruit fighters against the Russians.

It is a twisted misuse of religion for political purposes,, 
Not at all unknown in the history of the world.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> This is not entirely correct. The Muslim jihadi movement would force Islam on all nations. They hate everything not Islamic.


What of the "democracy spreaders"?

How many countries are we in today? And I don't expect you to know that answer as Congress hasn't even a clue. Quite a few... Dozen.

I find it amazing that the multiple millions murdered at the hands of US foreign policy is overshadowed by groups of indigents whose philosophy often relies on 'our' meddlesome campaigns.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> The modern concept of war crimes originated with the idea that a new world order could be created. Atrocities are committed during war, but the idea we need a world body to control and govern nations, and mankind, is more abhorrent to my libertarian consciousness.


The topic of a war being just, thus leading to the discussion of war crimes and crimes against humanity has been discussed since, and probably before, Augustine and Aquinas. These aren't new concepts... that you can't use a war as an excuse to wantonly murder civilians. 

The mental gymnastics of the few, lawyerly types, who actually have a comprehension of the atrocities leaves little to even be regarded.

What they rely on, and indeed often succeed in their efforts is the propaganda campaigns and the public's public school indoctrination.

----------


## Number19

> What of the "democracy spreaders"?
> 
> How many countries are we in today? And I don't expect you to know that answer as Congress hasn't even a clue. Quite a few... Dozen.
> 
> I find it amazing that the multiple millions murdered at the hands of US foreign policy is overshadowed by groups of indigents whose philosophy often relies on 'our' meddlesome campaigns.


I agree. But what does this have to do with militant Islam.

----------


## pcosmar

> I agree. But what does this have to do with militant Islam.


They are a tool,, a pawn in the game.

What you are seeing (aside from the propaganda) is a deliberately weaponized religion.
 Used to recruit the weak minded and ignorant to become cannon fodder.

These fighters are not spiritual seekers.. They are more drug addled thugs and hoodlums that use a bit of religion to justify themselves.

----------


## Number19

> NO. It did not.
> The concept of War Crimes has been around much longer.(1400s) Long before the Geneva convention.
> 
> And the Geneva Conventions were before the creation of the League of Nations.


I don't disagree with anything you posted. But the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 were followed by the League of Nations (1920-1946). You also had the Geneva Conventions of 1864, 1906 and 1926 and the Geneva Protocol of 1925. You had the Nuremberg Trials of 1945 and the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal of 1946. The United Nations replaced the League of Nations in 1946 and finally the International Criminal Court was created in 2002.

You can't have prosecution of war crimes without a world body having the authority to do so, and with the political, economic and military power to enforce the decisions.

That body, today, is the United Nations and its goal is a one-world government.

----------


## pcosmar

> That body, today, is the United Nations and its goal is a one-world government.


No dispute on that.

I was only pointing out that "War Crimes" was a concept that predated them. 
Very seldom is the victor even charged with the crimes committed..

But then again,, and back to the question at hand.. The State of Israel was created by that same United Nations.

And the League of Nations had  destroyed the Economy of Germany,, and set the stage for WWII.

WWIII will bring the One world Government into being,,, 
It will be in the Mid East. and provocations are well underway for that. It is the reason the State of Israel was created.

----------


## THX 1138

> This is exactly the kind of one-sided thinking that a couple here have been talking about.
> 
> I'm not on this site very much, so maybe I just haven't read the more balanced, truthful replies.  So I'm not going to claim that no one ever criticizes the other side.
> 
> However, based on what I have seen, it's always the sort of thing you just said.  "Israel is evil" "Israel is racist"  "Israel is hateful, Israel discriminates"  yadda yadda yadda.
> 
> Hello????  Am I in the twilight zone here, or what?  If you don't realize how extreme the Muslim hatred is against Jews, and how they are raised to hate Jews with a passion, and how they do NOT want peace, they want all Jews dead..... then you guys are either willfully blind, or woefully misinformed.
> 
> Now before I get tarred and feathered, and chased off of this site.... I'm not pro Israel.   I'm pro honesty and fairness.  
> ...




I've never been to either a Muslim nation or to Israel. However, I've met people who been to both. 

You are right: There are Muslims in the Middle East that do teach their children to hate Jews and the West in general. There are also orthodox Jews in Israel that teach _their_ children to hate Arabs - and the West in general. 

I do not believe it is our responsibility to give even a shred of financial support or military aid of any to ANY of these nations.

----------


## Number19

> No dispute on that.
> 
> I was only pointing out that "War Crimes" was a concept that predated them. 
> Very seldom is the victor even charged with the crimes committed..
> 
> But then again,, and back to the question at hand.. The State of Israel was created by that same United Nations.
> 
> And the League of Nations had  destroyed the Economy of Germany,, and set the stage for WWII.
> 
> ...


I am in agreement with all your comments except for the very last statement that "(this) is the reason the State of Israel was created". I won't go that far although I also will not dismiss the possibility. This gets into conspiracy theory, and while I enjoy reading in this area, I've found discussion to be unprofitable. And I won't go into the theological debate that these events are preordained.

----------


## pcosmar

> And I won't go into the theological debate that these events are preordained.


OK,,

Then by what criteria do you have for any legitimacy of the UN created State of Israel.

I hear a lot about it's "right to exist" ..
 What criteria do you have for the right or legitimacy of the United Nations to create a nation in the lands of other Free people?

I am curious..

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> I agree. But what does this have to do with militant Islam.


Quite a bit, actually.

Are you aware of the founding of the Islamic Courts Union, Al-Shabab; that the United States trained many a mujahideen in bomb making and counterintelligence, that many of those 'Afghans' went off after the war and trained many more? What of the history of AQI or AQAP are you aware of? What of the relationship with the House of Saud do you know about? Are you aware of the no bid contracts and recycled foreign military aid that keeps dictators in power and American corporations busy?

What does this have to do with militant Islam? A lot. These policies are foolish, turn by and large entire populations against America, and promote a breeding ground for radical Islam to have a greater effect. 

These half-wits are teaching them to build bombs.

----------


## Number19

> ... What criteria do you have for the right or legitimacy of the United Nations to create a nation in the lands of other Free people?


The U.N. has no right or legitimacy to create a nation in the lands of other free people. The United States should withdraw from the United Nations.




> ...Then by what criteria do you have for any legitimacy of the UN created State of Israel...


I accept Israel a a fait accompli. We must move on.




> ...I hear a lot about it's "right to exist" ...


 No nation has a "right" to exist, not even the United States. Only individuals have rights. By the same token, Palestinians do not have a right to "Palestine".

Blacks do not have a right to restitution for the slavery of the past. Equally, Palestinians younger than 67 have no right to restitution for wrongs committed in the past. I would be open to discussions for restitution to older Palestinians removed from their homes in 1947.

----------


## pcosmar

> I accept Israel a a fait accompli.


Oh,,, I accept it.. like Obama's presidency. or Cancer. It is a reality that must be dealt with as it is.

I just don't support it in any way.




> Palestinians younger than 67 have no right to restitution for wrongs committed in the past. I would be open to discussions for restitution to older Palestinians removed from their homes in 1947.


What about those that have suffered abuse and lost homes and lands more recently? Like currently?

----------


## Number19

> Quite a bit, actually.
> 
> Are you aware of the founding of the Islamic Courts Union, Al-Shabab; that the United States trained many a mujahideen in bomb making and counterintelligence, that many of those 'Afghans' went off after the war and trained many more? What of the history of AQI or AQAP are you aware of? What of the relationship with the House of Saud do you know about? Are you aware of the no bid contracts and recycled foreign military aid that keeps dictators in power and American corporations busy?
> 
> What does this have to do with militant Islam? A lot. These policies are foolish, turn by and large entire populations against America, and promote a breeding ground for radical Islam to have a greater effect. 
> 
> These half-wits are teaching them to build bombs.


I have no disagreement with your commentary. My comments are directed against only those jihadi whose militarism is solely based on their interpretation of the Quran. How much this interpretation may be the result of middle eastern interventionism dating back a hundred years or more is something impossible to determine. This interventionism also must be accepted as a fait accompli and decisions today can only be made based on the current situation. A start would be for the United States to change its foreign policy to one of non-interventionism. But this won't happen, so pcosmar is pretty much right on.

----------


## pcosmar

> But this won't happen, so pcosmar is pretty much right on.


I suspect my observations are very close.. and I take no joy in that.

I base my observations on  history and prophecy and current events. 

We are living in interesting times.

----------


## Number19

> What about those that have suffered abuse and lost homes and lands more recently? Like currently?


Yes

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> I have no disagreement with your commentary. My comments are directed against only those jihadi whose militarism is solely based on their interpretation of the Quran. How much this interpretation may be the result of middle eastern interventionism dating back a hundred years or more is something impossible to determine. This interventionism also must be accepted as a fait accompli and decisions today can only be made based on the current situation. A start would be for the United States to change its foreign policy to one of non-interventionism. But this won't happen, so pcosmar is pretty much right on.


The radicalization of many is directly related to the fact that they watch their fellow countrymen incinerated in errant strikes. It is because there is an occupying force on their land conducting hundreds of midnight raids monthly shooting innocents and terrorizing the populace. It is because of the decades of complicity in torturous regimes and the language commonly used by neoconservative war mongers here. We can speculate on the exact extent that this plays a role but regardless it is clear that it has played a considerable one. The backing of various radical factions and the direct and predictable consequences thereof cannot be understated. From Al Shabab's ascent to being the player that it is from a band of disorganized low level jihadists to the current fiasco in Iraq. I mean, this isn't happening within a vacuum nor is it largely happening because of the more fundamentalist view of the Quran. These countries were some of the most advanced in the region and have been decimated in every sense of the word.

Perhaps we are in agreement. That being that our alliance with Israel is foolish and has caused quite a few problems for us, that the military and foreign aid needs ended for everyone, immediately, that the United States ought withdraw from the United Nations, and that many of the current administration, and the previous administrations ought be tried for their crimes by a competent court within the United States. Now the reality is that none of these things will happen, of course, but regardless it is what should happen if there is to be remotely a semblance of justice. And sure, we will still be attacked periodically by rogue cells. We have courts capable of handling this. If the folks overseas were brought home, the level of attacks, simply through eliminating opportunities, would decrease. Perhaps the children whose families were blown up by Hellfires won't grow up to wage war against the citizens of this country. Who am I kidding though, they kicked hornet's nests for the past 70 years to enrich a few at the expense of many and to ensure global hegemony.. this 'war' will be going on in perpetuity until the United States is bankrupt and the dollar removed from its position of prominence. And when that happens, and the people have amply starved, they will be begging for a world government based upon socialism, fractional reserve fiat ethics and the 'safety' only a totalitarian would promise.

----------


## P3ter_Griffin

This seems like as good a place as any to stick this.  George Galloway 'The Crisis of Palestine'.

----------


## cindy25

is Israel a friend because of the aid?  at one time Israel's closest allies were Czechoslovakia and France.  Ike was on the side of Egypt during Suez.

Israel is not the bastion of freedom it is portrayed as.  brutal conscription, high taxes, socialized health care and education.

----------


## robert68

> You continue to be one who has given some thought to the consequences of a changed foreign policy; and I tend to agree that Israel's economy would suffer with the withdrawal of U.S. support. I also agree that numbers of Israelis would leave.
> 
> But now, what you have remaining is an entrenchment of the hardcore nationalists supported by a war economy and from abroad.
> 
> It is from this point - an Israel under siege - than I am concerned.
> 
> Now, kcchiefs6465, says he doesn't give a "$#@!" what happens. If nuclear fallout drifts over Europe, or drifts east toward India and China, he doesn't care.
> 
> Who would have thought that the assassination of an Austrian archduke would have triggered WW1? What would be the unintended consequences of an Israel under siege? Should we care?
> ...


Who would hardcore nationalists target with nukes, if no states were attacking Israel, but it was losing foreign investment and this was causing its standard of living to drop and a significant number of Israeli’s to leave? 

Furthermore, libertarianism is about individual rights, and no party can negotiate away the individual rights of the Palestinians, especially US bribed Palestinian quislings. Those “negotiations” are always charades.

I've read a good deal of the land the Palestinians were driven from in ‘48 remains sparsely populated or owned by the state, and that 80 percent of the population in pre 67 territory is concentrated in 2 metropolitan areas. Even Abba Eban (if you know who he is) years ago advocated some return of land to the Palestinians in the Galilee (or somewhere). Israel opposes any return of Palestinians to pre 67 territories only because it will diminish the Jewish majority they have.

----------


## enhanced_deficit

> is Israel a friend because of the aid?  at one time Israel's closest allies were Czechoslovakia and France.  Ike was on the side of Egypt during Suez.
> 
> Israel is not the bastion of freedom it is portrayed as.  brutal conscription, high taxes, socialized health care and education.



True.  They were not always "our only ally" and the "only non-racist democracy" in the mideast.

*The threat of sanctions worked against Israel in 1956  and it can work again*

_Jinan Bastaki on July 30, 2014 
_
   In 1957, President Eisenhower addressed the US public:
Should a nation which attacks and occupies foreign  territory in the  face of United Nations disapproval be allowed to impose  conditions on  its own withdrawal? If we agreed that armed attack can  properly achieve  the purposes of the assailant, then I fear we will have  turned back  the clock of international order.
 If the United Nations once admits that international disputes can be   settled by using force, then we will have destroyed the very foundation   of the organization and our best hope of establishing world order. The   United Nations must not fall. I believe that in the interests of peace   the United Nations has no choice but to exert pressure upon Israel to   comply with the withdrawal resolutions. [1]Eisenhower was referring to the 1956 Suez crisis, when France,   Britain and Israel invaded and occupied the Suez canal, parts of the   Sinai and Gaza. Gamal Abdel-Nasser, the charismatic and Pan-Arab leader   of Egypt, had nationalized the Suez Canal on the 26th of July 1956.  This  especially antagonized Britain and France, and France was already  wary  with Nasser over his support of Algerian fighters. As scholar Avi  Shlaim  writes, on the 24th of October 1956 in Sevres, France, Britain  and  Israel met for secret talks to plan to attack Egypt. The goals  included  capturing the Sinai and Suez Canal, as well as toppling  Nassers  government.
 And on 29 October, Operation Kadesh began with the invasion of the Sinai by Israel.

*The USs role and sanctions*

*The United States submitted a draft resolution to the Security Council on 30 October, calling upon Israel immediately  to withdraw its armed forces behind the established armistice lines.*   However, France and Britain vetoed the resolution. The matter was then   transferred to the General Assembly. The next day, the General  Assembly  adopted, on the proposal of the United States, resolution 997  (ES-I),  calling for an immediate ceasefire, the withdrawal of all forces behind the armistice lines and the reopening of the Canal.

 However, it seemed that the invading powers did not want to budge.   Israel refused to withdraw from Gaza and from the Sinai, and Britain   from the Suez. President Eisenhower threatened sanctions against Israel,   but was thwarted by the pro-Israel lobby in Congress. Eisenhower   demanded throughout January and February of 1957 that Israel withdraw   from the Gaza strip.

*Finally, it was the threat of sanctions that forced Israel in March  1957 to withdraw.* Eisenhower  threatened that the US would cut off all  private assistance to Israel,  which amounted to $40 million in  tax-deductible donations and $60  million annually in the purchase of  bonds. He would also   terminate shipments of agricultural products and all military   assistance, including deals already in the pipeline. He canceled export   licenses for the shipment of munitions or other military goods. The   threat of sanctions in the form of a resolution to the UN requiring the   termination of all aid to Israel by UN members if it failed to withdraw   was also decisive.


*U.S. had emergency plan for attacking Israel in 1967*

Apr 23, 2007 - For some time, the United States had had an emergency  plan to attack  Israel, a plan updated just prior to the 1967 war, aimed  at preventing  Israel from expanding westward, into Sinai, or eastward,  into the West  Bank.                                                  
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                In  May 1967, one of the U.S. commands  was charged with the task of  removing the plan from the safe,  refreshing it and preparing for an  order to go into action.

----------


## Number19

> Who would hardcore nationalists target with nukes, if no states were attacking Israel, but it was losing foreign investment and this was causing its standard of living to drop and a significant number of Israeli’s to leave? 
> 
> Furthermore, libertarianism is about individual rights, and no party can negotiate away the individual rights of the Palestinians, especially US bribed Palestinian quislings. Those “negotiations” are always charades.
> 
> I've read a good deal of the land the Palestinians were driven from in ‘48 remains sparsely populated or owned by the state, and that 80 percent of the population in pre 67 territory is concentrated in 2 metropolitan areas. Even Abba Eban (if you know who he is) years ago advocated some return of land to the Palestinians in the Galilee (or somewhere). Israel opposes any return of Palestinians to pre 67 territories only because it will diminish the Jewish majority they have.


My post #194 was in reply to your post #190. In post #194 I implied that, faced only with a Gazan threat, Israel would respond with conventional weapons. I then stated that, if confronted with a united middle-eastern threat and its existence was threatened, Israel would respond with nuclear weapons. I also mentioned in post #204 that only when confronted by a multi-nation attack would they resort to nukes.

Faced with the severe sanctions you mention, the Israelis which do not leave the country would unite and entrench themselves under a severe war time economy. If faced with no attack, they would persevere. But your premise, as stated in post #190, is that the Palestinians would wage a high tech guerrilla war against Israel. I responded in post #194, that under these circumstances, Israel would be much more severe in its counter-measures and that the death totals would drastically increase, on both sides. You state that Israel would, eventually, just give up the fight and surrender its sovereignty. I don't believe this will be the case. It's much more likely that nations will be drawn into the conflict and this is when nukes would be used.

But this is all just hypothetical. The U.S. will not abandon its commitment to Israel.

I am not a citizen of Israel and I presume neither are you. So in the grand scheme of middle-eastern politics, you and I have no impact or influence on outcomes. However, I am very much interested in reading about honest proposals which could lead to a peace in the region, however unlikely.

I also believe, that as a libertarian, it is in my personal interests to do, however little, whatever I can to help prevent the use of nuclear weapons.

And just to remind everyone, on numerous occasions, I've stated that I am a non-interventionist when it comes to American politics. I exercise this belief at the ballot box.

And addressing post #249:

"...“Should a nation which attacks and occupies foreign territory in the face of United Nations disapproval be allowed to impose conditions on its own withdrawal? If we agreed that armed attack can properly achieve the purposes of the assailant, then I fear we will have turned back the clock of international order. If the United Nations once admits that international disputes can be settled by using force, then we will have destroyed the very foundation of the organization and our best hope of establishing world order. The United Nations must not fall..."

Sounds like Eisenhower was an early proponent of the new world order.

----------


## squarepusher



----------


## twomp

> 


If only that were true. The majority of the world could care less about Palestine or the civilians there. The Israeli PR machine has made it so the world believes that everyone in Palestine is a terrorist and every death just means the death of another terrorist. Remember, the Israelis are the victims here. All they want is peace.

----------


## squarepusher

> If only that were true. The majority of the world could care less about Palestine or the civilians there. The Israeli PR machine has made it so the world believes that everyone in Palestine is a terrorist and every death just means the death of another terrorist. Remember, the Israelis are the victims here. All they want is peace.


This is not accurate, the world mostly sides with Palestine, with the exception of the US which compared to the rest of the world, is more likely to support Israel.

----------


## robert68

> ... But your premise, as stated in post #190, is that the Palestinians would wage a high tech guerrilla war against Israel.


I regret initially suggesting a high tech guerrilla war against Israel would be the first negative consequence to Israel from a non interventionist US foreign policy. And I should have been clear it wasnt my premise in my last post. I havent gone into this subject in a while.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> [Snipped for space]
> 
> I am not a citizen of Israel and I presume neither are you. So in the grand scheme of middle-eastern politics, you and I have no impact or influence on outcomes. However, I am very much interested in reading about honest proposals which could lead to a peace in the region, however unlikely.
> 
> I also believe, that as a libertarian, it is in my personal interests to do, however little, whatever I can to help prevent the use of nuclear weapons.
> 
> [Snipped for space]


The way to promote peace is to promote a free market and set an example for other nations to follow. After decades of their meddling they figure the only way for peace is more [foolish] meddling. They aren't wise enough to foresee [and plan for] the infinite scenarios that could occur when human actions are involved. Any step of the way, things could go wrong. In fact, given the current outcome, one could comfortably argue that their failure is inevitable. Unless it was done on purpose, though even then I don't think they are wise enough to purposely $#@! something up in such a way.

It isn't as if because they have gone about this path for so long that it must be continued. American's safety is jeopardized by their actions. The argument literally boils down to, "Well, they've completely made the wrong choices for the right or wrong reasons, world affairs are in relative shambles, but let us trust them to make the right choices _this_ time. The other outcome would be chaos and possible global annihilation."

I've seen this argument manifest itself in various forms. From the case against immigration, to the case for worker benefits, to the case for tariffs and other protectionist policies, to foreign policy. It's the all encompassing sophistic retort. "Well we can't do this, though I agree it should be done, until this is done, which won't be done, so therefore we ought keep the current pace." And while one argues for this, another argues for that.

My two cents on the matter, anyways.

----------


## philipped

> I find the entire post rather insulting, of both intelligence and motivation of the members here.


Yeah this was bumped and I'll say is this...as a non-religious person I chose to not get personally involved in a civil war that's one way painted as assistance to our greatest ally in the region AND painted as our country may have enabled this entire land grab. I don't support Aid and I do not see any validity in an alliance with them. As someone else posted earlier, we are SOVEREIGN.

----------


## maybemaybenot

> Axis of Evil: US, Israel and Saudi Arabia.
> 
> (Their governments, not necessarily their people--however their/our people do make up the government.)
> 
> Does this mean I think Iran, North Korea and Iraq are wonderful? $#@! no--but I hold us and our allies to higher standards. Should I not?


So what would you do differently if you were in Israel's position? Its nice to criticize from afar, and ignore Palestinian missiles and terror tunnels from afar, but Israelis can't live in your fantasy. They have to deal with those rockets.




> If that is the case, why no Israeli troops stood with American troops on frontlines in Iraq during Operation Iraqi Freedom?
> 
> How many terror attacks against America took place before and after America started funding Israeli occupation of Palestinians?
> 
> Do you believe arabs and jews are equal as races or one is more chosen than the other... in other words, do you support or oppose zionism?
> 
> Just to understand where you are coming from.


Israel gives intelligence and training, they can't send troops to an Arab war zone allies with the US, because then any US-Arab coalition will fall apart. The vast majority of Muslim nations refuse to recognize Israel or fight alongside them, and whenever the US intervenes in the Middle East they're trying to win the hearts and minds. So no Israeli troops.

Btw, Zionism doesn't put Jews above Arabs, Islamism puts Muslims above non-Muslims. Muslims vote in Israel, own land, go to Islamic public schools, use Sharia law family courts, go to Mosque, etc. Jews aren't allowed to do that in Palestine. Hence Israel take your advice and surrender to Islamic rule.




> You're right, and this is why we are so disappointed and outraged. We have been enablers. The Jewish settlers made up 8% of the total population and inherited 55% of the land under the 1947 UN plan, yet they continue to seize and occupy more and more, and we have emboldened it....


You don't know what you're talking about, and your first map up there is a total falsehood. The first map takes Jewish owned land and calls it "Jewish land," then it takes Muslim land *and govt-owned lan* and calls it "Palestine." Its bigoted, AND it doesn't represent any actual borders or boundaries whatsoever, its a total fiction. 85% of southern Isrsel, the Negev desery. was owned by the British govt. So to say it was Palestine, and separate out Jewish land, is just bull$#@!. Further, Maps 3 and 4 both represent Arab invasions where Israel expanded its territory, AND Israel offered all the conquered land back for peace, but the Arabs refused, continuing to promise (and wage) endless war to destroy Israel. Oh, and you ignore Jordan getting 75% of the Palestine Mandate, so to say the Jews got the majority of it is just silly.




> I like to keep my knows in domestic policy - but, this whole Palestine and Israel mess is making me sick as does ALL killings. I've seen dozens of pictures/videos of dead children in the past week from Palestine ... parents claim it's Israel doing the killing. Then, I see pictures/video from Israel saying they ARE doing the killing !!! WTF !!!
> 
> Sooo, I stopped reading this OP at "You can disagree with actions that Israel takes in terms of military strategy without expressing hatred of Israel and their people."
> 
> I disagree 100%. *100% I tell ya.* 
> 
> It takes some sick POS to target an kill children *for ANY reason what so ever* .. and even sicker POS to defend that action. If you care to know what I think.


Israel does not target Palestinian children, Hamas targets Palestinian children. Hamas stores weapons in schools, hospitals, churches, mosques, homes. Hamas owns empty land, but they purposely fire from residential areas to get their own ppl killed. Ffs you ppl practically endorse Hamas by ignoring this. Using human shields does not make someone immune from being attacked. Hamas is responsible for the absurd number of civilian casualties, they literally tell ppl to go where Israel says they're going to attack.




> Thoughts ? 
> 
> http://youtu.be/iXRO1YFreNA
> 
> 
> Make note what the lady at the end of this video says ...
> 
> Remember what Ron Paul said about Hamas (?)  Interesting huh ? 
> 
> http://youtu.be/27esxkQtfTc


Lol your video iis so stupid is ridiculous. It says Israel's justification for the Gaza bombardment is three Israeli teens dying (a stupid myth ppl here love to repeat). No, actually its the 1,500 rockets Gaza fired into Israel. You ppl just ignore this and talk about the three teenagers all day. Gaza has been firing thousands of rockets into Israel for yrs. That's why Israel destroys their rocket launchers and their weapons storage. Second, the video says ISrael has no proof that Hamas killed the 3 teens, and started giving evidence why. Well guess what. While you were busy not giving a $#@! about the Israeli-Arab conflict (which is fine, they haven't earned our attention), Hamas admitted that their members committed the murders. So your conspiracy video is just silly. Hamas admitted this, and you're still arguing that they didn't do it, its delusional.

Oh, and what Paul said about Israel creating Hamas is just stupid. Hamas is part of the Muslim Brotherhood, a massive Egyptian group thats in dozens of countries, founded in 1929(ish?). Hamas is just a Palestinian chapter of MB. This isn't even a conspiracy theory, everyone admits this.




> I saw this video posted by someone under the headline, "The Most Important Video About Israel Ever Made", and watched it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And then I did a search on "middle east before 1948" and among the returns was this page: http://dlhak.wordpress.com/.../a-history-lesson-for.../ which includes images from old books, including a color map from a 1921 book:
> 
> http://dlhak.files.wordpress.com/201...920-2-0022.jpg <=== for some reason this pic won't display correctly, so here is a link to it instead.
> 
> ...


Nope, it does not sound right, it sounds like a fictional version of history. Palestine was and is a sub-area of Arabia, that never changed, unless you're implying Arabia was a country, which it wasn't. It was part of Turkey. Not Arabia. Turkey lost the Arab world. In Turkey's place, Israel, Jordan, Palestine, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon was created. No one's land was stolen. Muslims are pissed that Sharia law wasn't maintained in the land that became Israel, which violates the Quran, so they invaded Israel. The creation of Israel did not mean anyone had to "give up their land." In fact, Israel was the only country there affording equal rights to each group. Your entire argument is that Muslim control must be permanent, even if we're inventing countries to replace old ones. Btw, I acknowledge all these countries were created illegally. *So why don't you, instead of singling out Israel?* Lol you complain that the ppl there didn't agree to it. Out of all those countries illegally invented, Israel is the only one with democratic elections, including Muslim voters, and you call THEM the country where ppl didn't agree to their govt?




> You have got to be kidding or deliberately trolling. The stated goal of AQ, Hamas, Fatah, the government of Iran etc and so on is to remove the Israeli regime and give the Palestinians a country. Our support of the Israeli regime has caused the Iranian hostage crisis, 9/11 and the war in Afghanistan and all sorts of other conflicts in the middle east.


Lol destroying Israel (and stripping the Jews of their rights or outright murdering them) is "THE stated goal," therefore its all Israel. So the US and the WWI/II allies invent every country there, stick military bases everywhere, including Saudia Arabia in order to get to their oil. Muslims bitch about ALL foreign intervention (rightfully so), and you think its just Israel? You think the US/UK gave the Saud family a country and military support for Israel? Btw, I admit that supporting Israel (at least as strongly as we currently do) hurts our image in the Middle East, for sure, but to say its just Israel is absurd. You basically nod your head whenever a terrorist complains about Israel. They complain about all Western countries on Muslim land.




> I don't like Israel because their excuse to exist there is that they are descendants of German concentration camp survivors and yet they themselves also run a couple concentration camps.
> 
> Ron Paul refers to Gaza Strip as a concentration camp:


Zionism started in the 1880's, not the 1940's. Oh, and they don't run concentration camps, they fight a war against invaders that refuse to surrender. So, more war. What would you do differently when Palestine attacked in 1967? Actually answer the question, don't just bitch, what would you do. You'd lay down and die? You'd pretend Palestine signed a peace treaty and wasn't firing missiles at your ppl?




> Well, I can't speak for green73, but I can't stand Israel and I'm unapologetic about it...to me, given all the harm that it's caused in the Middle East and to the US, Israel is like the ring of Sauron...or the Beast in Revelations that deceives the whole world. 
> 
> No hyperbole, it's truly this wicked and troublesome.


Lol the Arabs invaded Israel *before* Israel stole land from anyone. The Arabs promised to kick every Jew out, and to implement Sharia law over all. Yes, they all hate Israel. Acting civilized pisses off Middle Easterners, what can I tell you. Granting voting, property and religious rights to each group pisses off Middle Eastern Muslims. If you went to the Middle East and exercised freedom of speech, they'd attack you just like they attack Israel.




> Stop spreading lies.



Also, in the first map, 1946, the maps takes Jewish-owned land and calls it Jewish, then takes Muslim owned land *and govt-owned land* an calls it "Palestine." As if Muslims are entitled to public land but not Jews. Its bigoted AND its a complete falsehood.

----------


## amy31416

I'm convinced. Israel is always wonderful all the time, and they've never taken welfare checks from US taxpayers or gotten us into wars on their behalf. The Lavon Affair is complete rubbish and bombing the crap out of the USS Liberty was really just an "oops."

Quit taking US taxpayer money, using our military, using human shields, stealing land, and buying our congress. No problem--until that happens, you can go place your fingers in your nether regions repeatedly.

Nobody buys your bull$#@!, son.

----------


## maybemaybenot

> I was once an Israel supporter, but I can no longer say that I am.  I cannot support a government that denies basic rights to it's inhabitants.  It's just like South Africa pre-1994.


No, you're confusing Israel with Palestine. Israeli Muslims vote, own property, go to Islamic public school, go to mosque. In Palestine, Jews can't live there or own land, they execute ppl for converting away from Islam or selling land to Jews, they don't allow freedom of speech, and 13 yr old girls are sold off as "wives" (sex slaves) to be raped by guys who can't get laid consensually.




> *Most people wouldn't simply call a truce if their family were murdered.* Our support of Israel, as well as many other foolish policies in the Middle East and the North/East of Africa incites many and actually plays into the hands of Jihadist recruiters.
> 
> The CIA meddling, their training of the Mujahideen, their training "Afghans" (these people traveled from everywhere and eventually, largely, dispersed) in the art of bomb making, counter intelligence, etc. the radicalized text books and propaganda afforded through US tax dollars. These issues aren't going to go away. Regardless of whether or not the United States comes home today. You kick hornet's nest all year long, what outcome was ever expected?
> 
> And I'm rather short in this response but could reply more in depth if you wanted. _The Sorrows of Empire_ by Chalmers Johnson comes to mind. William Blum has had a few on the matter.


Palestine invaded Israel before Israel stole any land from anyone! Palestine promised to kick out every Jews. Muslims start conflicts, lose, then bitch that they're the victims. Stop starting wars then bitching about the other side being better than you. lol "most ppl wouldn't simply call a truce if their family was murdered." Gaza's govt promises to kill every Jew! Palestine started this whole thing.




> Israel is an apartheid state with unbounded racism and hate towards the Palestinians. Israel was formed by aggressively forcing the Palestinians out of their land and murdering anybody who got in their way. Our continued support of them and their behavior is a large part of why that region hates us. (That, and we drop bombs on them, which also doesn't help)


No, Israel is not an apartheid state, Palestine invaded Israel for the stated purpose of implementing apartheid. Israel's Muslims vote, go to public school, own land, etc. Palestine doesn't allow Jews to live there. Before Israel stole any land from anyone, Palestine invaded Israel promising to kick out every Jew. Israel is not apartheid. Palestine is. You're welcome.




> This is what happens after 66 years of Israeli/AIPAC indoctrination. There are two sides to every story and you have gotten all your facts from one side only. You sound like Dianne Sawyer and the rest of MSM news anchors crying about the pain and devastation that the Israeli have to go through while totally neglecting the Palestinian civilians who are going through FAR worse than the Israeli citizens.
> 
> There is a bully and a victim. You are siding with the bully.


Lol you're criticizing someone else for where they get their facts from? You refuse to acknowledge that Hamas uses human shields, or fires missiles into Israel. You're delusional.




> The dead children stirred no hornet's nest. What stirred a hornet's nest to come would be the support of Israel as they commit these sorts of atrocities. The children's machined gunned, mangled corpses will be spread throughout all of West Asia and North, West, Central, and East Africa.
> 
> We're talking over 90% civilian mortality rate with the other 10% being arguable at best.
> 
> The hell are you babbling about, "Palestinians"? As if this was some concerted, country wide attack.


They have a high civilian casualty rate *because Hamas tries to get them killed.* Hamas owns tons of land, and they fire weapons from schools, hospitals, mosques, churches. All they have is a propaganda war, so they maximize their deaths and call them martyrs. They admit all of this. You have to at least place some of the blame for this on Hamas. And if not, then stop pretending to give a f*ck about Palestinians.

Lol Israel doesn't want Africa. They gave away the majority of their land, in Africa, for peace. So no, they don't want Africa. Oh and Gaza's government is attacking Israel, Hamas is their govt, they're not just some group somewhere.




> Wrong.
> Some Syrians consider Palestine theirs. And possibly some Egyptians too. Maybe some Jordanians as well. They all have interests there.
> 
> The Zionists are the new kids on the block,, and they are not making friends.


No, you're moving the ball, He brought up history: there's never been a Palestinian state before 1947, ever. He brought up Syria because Syria, the Levant WAS a country before Arabia (or Turkey?) took it over, and it included the region of Palestine, Hence if there was a backup nation-state after the fall of the Ottoman Empire, it would be Syria. All the other Muslim countries invented at that time were just that, inventions, just like Israel. The fact that the land was called Palestine simply acknowledges that the residents used words to describe places, it was never a state or a nation.




> Texas has been part of Spain, Mexico and France. Since 1845 it has been one of the United States. Does that mean it doesn't exist? Does that mean it didn't exist until they got sick of being mistreated by Mexico?
> 
> If you want to argue with someone and call them ignorant, why not start with T.E. Lawrence of Arabia?
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.pef.org.uk/profiles/lt-co...-dso-1888-1935
> 
> When the British Colonial Office appointed governors of Palestine and put it on their maps of the British Empire, was that an Arabian PR stunt?


Yes! This is our entire argument! The British invented Palestine as a territory/nation/state! When the British took over, the map started to say Palestine! Not before.




> Zionists love to play the American Indians card on Americans. But just one of the differences between the two situations is if the Palestinians had the citizenship rights the Native Americans do in the US, the Palestinians would have an easy voting majority in their native land Palestine, almost flipping the Jewish/Palestinian demographic balance that presently exists in Israel.





> North Dakota is largely uninhabited. Should we relocate them all and shoot the ones that won't go to make room for the embattled Kurds?
> 
> After all, technically they aren't North Dakotans, they're Americans...


That's not what happened! In fact, that's what Palestine promised to do to Israel when they invaded in 1947! They promised to kick out every Jew. Jews moved and bought land, then started a country when there was no country, when all those countries were being invented. They didn't kick out Muslims until after the Muslims invaded and promised to kick out every Jew (it doesn't justify kicking put 80% of the Muslim population, but your version of events is just bullsh!t).




> Some perhaps. But most of it was like the Railroad at the James Farm. 
> 
> Much like they are still being pushed out today.


No, his statement is factual, Jews didn't steal an inch of land before 1948. That is a fact. No pushing out, no James Farm, nothing. You're just lying.




> Zionists love to play the American Indians card on Americans. But just one of the differences between the two situations is if the Palestinians had the citizenship rights the Native Americans do in the US, the Palestinians would have an easy voting majority in their native land Palestine, almost flipping the Jewish/Palestinian demographic balance that presently exists in Israel.


If Palestine is their native land, why aren't you complaining about Jordan? Muslims in Israel have full citizenship rights, Jews aren't allowed to live in Palestine at all. Palestine invaded Israel because Israel gave voting/property/religious rights to everyone. If anything you're arguing for stripping ppl of their rights. Palestine doesn't have some right to invade a foreign country to implement borders that never existed in the history of the planet, and then treat non-Muslims like second class citizens.




> The fact is Jews held around 7% of the land in Palestine in 1947, and most of that land was acquired from absentee landlords, not the true owners.


And Muslims held at most 20% of the land, it was almost all govt owned, and Jews were a majority of the land that they claimed in 1947. And your argument about absentee landlords is totally valid, minus the part where you single out Israel. The entire Middle East had absentee landlords with legal title to the land, so that the true owners, legally "tenants," wouldn't have to pay a special tax or serve in the military. Out of all the land in the entire region, you single out the land purchased by Jews as the questionable title. Bullsh1t. If you're going to call out the JNF's land purchases because of the *Ottoman* land system, then call out the entire former Ottoman Empire, *OR* show evidence that Jews did this more than others.




> New law dividing Christian, Muslim Arabs legalizes inequality
> 
> 
> 
> I guess there goes your "we are all eqaul in Israel" argument now doesn't it? Quick go ask your handler or FOX News how you should reply.
> 
> http://972mag.com/new-law-seeks-to-d...m-arabs/87705/


But there's no difference in how they're treated. The major purpose for classifying based on religion is for the separated religious family courts, which Muslims support more than anyone else (so do Orthodox Jews). Muslims want Sharia law as far and wide as possible, Israel gave it to them as far as family courts (and the Orthodox right, I don't mean to leave them out in this). That's what this is for. Now, whether or not to separate Christians from Arabs, and the whole "Jew cannot be Arab and vice versa" is very political, but it has nothing to do with reduced rights.




> You are confused. Historically it's been_ Christians_ who hate Jews. Jews and Muslims have peacefully coexisted in the Mideast for 1500 years. It's _Israelis_ that Muslims hate.


Nope, your PC liberal friends have whitewashed Muslim history. The Quran calls on Muslims to kill every Jew. When they say Muslims and Jews got along, they mean it in a condescending way where they expect less from Muslims. The Ottoman Empire charged an infidel tax, regulated where infidels could live, regulated how and where they could build religious facilities, limited worship in public, they condoned anti-Jewish violence. They did not live in peace. In Israel, on the other hand, Jews and Muslims exercise the same rights. Hence every Muslim neighbor invaded them before they stole any land from anyone, promising to kick out every Jew.




> When you say stuff like this:
> 
> 
> It pretty much invalidates what you say when you say this:
> 
> 
> You can't say something stupid like all Muslims "are raised to hate Jews with a passion" then say you want to be "honest and fair." You sound like Fox News, "Fair and balanced" when that is the furthest from the truth. Your hatred of all things Muslim shows your Israeli/AIPAC/MSM indoctrination. The Israeli carry the biggest stick on the block and on top of that, they have big brother U.S.A watching their back along with NATO and the EU yet you are here playing the Israeli victim card. More Muslim civilians have been killed by Israelis than Israeli civilians have been killed by Muslims. 
> 
> The score card isn't even REMOTELY CLOSE. Go to almost any other internet website and you will find see how many other Israeli firsters like you are out there. You will find much more sympathy for your cause there. Like I said, around here. Our eyes are open.


Muslims ARE raised to hate Jews with a passion! Palestinian public TV says Jews eat Muslim babies, that killing Jews is a good thing, this is throughout the region. They are. You believe in a fictional, delusional version of this conflict. YOu literally refuse to acknowledge that Hamas uses human shields or fires rockets into Israel, then you call other ppl indoctrinated?




> Lol.


You laugh at this anti-Jew, but every argument you make was handed to you by Muslim bigots who believe far worse. When you say this conflict is about Israel stealing land, you demosntrate that you only listen to bigots, or to other ppl that listen to bigots. Only a bigot thinks that putting up a Jewish flag (instead of an Islamic one, not instead of no religion) is "stealing land" when no one's land was stolen. I'm not saying you're a bigot, I'm saying your sources are.




> What is worse than state-sanctioned murder?


So Gaza fires rockets into Israel and promises to kill every Jew, and if Israel destroys their capabilities its "state-sanctioned murder." Do you think Palestinian attacks are at all relevant here?




> One assumption in your argument is that with a non-interventionist US foreign policy, the state of Israel would be able to survive. There are around 9 million Palestinians in and near historic Palestine, and between 5 and 6 million Israelis there. Firstly, Israel has never gone without western military and financial backing. Secondly, the Palestinians are weak and defenseless against the state of Israel, their tormentors and occupier, precisely because of US intervention in the region.
> 
> It only took a few hundred Hezbollah fighters with some hi-tech defensive weapons to stop Israels invasion of Lebanon a few years ago. Its US intervention in Jordan (2/3 Palestinian), Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, the Mediterranean Sea, Turkey, Iraq, and its enormous support for the state of Israel, that prevents millions of Palestinians from having hi-tech weapons and waging a successful guerrilla war against the occupiers of their land. 
> 
> No economy stays afloat in war, and even the expectation of an unending guerrilla war with millions of Palestinians would tank Israels economy, over night. Palestinians have nothing to lose in fighting their occupiers, the state of Israel; they already have a low standard of living and no rights on their native land. Israelis on the other hand, live 1st world comfortable with all the rights, and the loss of that 1st world comfort, will cause many Israelis to grab those passports for other countries that theyve maintained for an emergency, head to the airport and leave. As this all continues, many Israeli soldiers, knowing Israel is all alone in this unending struggle, would desert in increasing numbers. Eventually Israel, the settler colony/apartheid Jewish state in historic Palestine, would go the way East Germany did.


Wtf are you talkiing about with 9 million Palestinians and 5-6 million Jews? THere were far fewer than that. Give us a source for these numbers. Btw, Iran gives weapons and funding to Palestine, and using human shields isn't guerrila warfare, its just a crime against humanity.

----------


## maybemaybenot

> If only that were true. The majority of the world could care less about Palestine or the civilians there. The Israeli PR machine has made it so the world believes that everyone in Palestine is a terrorist and every death just means the death of another terrorist. Remember, the Israelis are the victims here. All they want is peace.


Wait. Not only do ppl not say that every Palestinian is a terrorist. You deny that they use human shields, and deny that they fire rockets into Israel. You're delusional.

----------


## Danke

http://video.search.yahoo.com/video/...0&fr=ipad&tt=b

----------


## presence

> Wait. Not only do ppl not say that every Palestinian is a terrorist. You deny that they use human shields, and deny that they fire rockets into Israel. You're delusional.


LOL just because the IDF targets civilians doesn't mean that they're human shields. 














> the Israel Defense Forces made use of the human shield procedure on 1,200 occasions over the last five years


http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...154142,00.html 





> In 2009, Wikileaks published an Israeli government memo stating:Individual Palestinians also testified to IDF abuses such as looting, beatings, vandalism of property and the *use of the local population as human shields*. But by far the strongest reverbration in Israel was that created by the *Israeli organization* Breaking the Silence, which *collected testimony from 26 unnamed IDF soldiers.* All of the soldiers had been involved in Operation Cast Lead in the Gaza Strip, and *testified to instances where Gazans were used as human shields*,  incendiary phosphorous shells were fired over civilian population  areas, and other examples of excessive firepower that caused unnecessary  fatalities and destruction of property.The Nation noted last month:Israeli soldiers have  systematically used Palestinians as human shields. Since Israels  incursion into the West Bank in 2002, it has used Palestinians as human  shields by tying young Palestinians onto the hoods of their cars or forcing them to go into a home where a potential militant may be hiding.And the Guardian pointed out:Israel, meanwhile, does not  have an unblemished record in the use of human shields. In 2010, two  soldiers were convicted in an IDF military court of using an 11-year-old Palestinian boy as  a human shield in its 2008-09 operation in Gaza. The pair ordered the  child to search bags they suspected of being booby-trapped.


http://itspalestinenotisrael.wordpre...ds-1200-times/

----------


## Danke

Happens all the time:

----------


## Danke



----------


## Danke



----------


## satchelmcqueen

israel needs to stand on its own. as should our country. simple as that. id love to see israel turn down MY money, but thats not happend yet. until then i see the government there (not the regular people) as scumbags, thieves and welfare recipients of MY money. i see our government in return as thieves, liars, manipulators and paying for bribes.

----------


## satchelmcqueen

> 


and they hate us why? (i ask my government)

----------


## pcosmar

> That is a fact. No pushing out, no James Farm, nothing. You're just lying.


A partial list of Zionist terrorist activities,, by just one group. (the current ruling party)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Irgun_attacks

----------

