Skip to main content

View Diary: 2012 Gaza Conflict: one can have one's own opinions - NOT one's own FACTS (+UPDATE) (476 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Thanks, Assaf, for keeping us (29+ / 0-)

    informed -- a much needed antidote to the corporate press.

    Overall, I''m heartened by the reaction at Daily Kos. Another reminder that the vast majority of people here oppose Israeli brutality and support the self-determination of Palestinians. This reality sometimes gets obscured because many tend to stay away from the issue on a day-to-day basis because of the nastiness of I-P threads and the active presence of a small minority of reflexive "pro-Israel" posters.

    •  I-wish-there-were-less-flame-wars,-b/c-dK-is-my (7+ / 0-)

      news-source,-usually-coming-with-links-somewhere-in-the-posts-&-comments.-I-don't-like-it-where-flame-wars-derail-conversation.

      The boss needs you, you don't need him. -- France general strike, May 1968

      by stargaze on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 07:32:02 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Me too (10+ / 0-)

        I'd like more people engaged on this issue; unfortunately, it tends to get considerable attention here only when there's an outbreak of violence.

        The flame wars work to the advantage of the small minority of "pro-Israel" posters because they poison the poll and push people away.

        •  Enough of that (6+ / 0-)

          bullshit.

          Anyone who says anything that isn't hard-line anti-Israel is considered "pro-Israel" and then you say they "poison the poll and push people away."

          This is the type of blanket comment that starts flame wars.  

          BTW, an escalation after the tit-for-tat may or may not mean the escalation was already planned.  It's likely that Israel has attack plans in place at any given moment.  Whether they are itching for any excuse to use them or simply put them into play rather than continuing small attack-response activities is anyone's guess.

          We know they are knee-jerk in over the top shock and awe response, but Hamas knows this as well - they know that lobbing missiles into Israel will provoke a ridiculously over the top response from Israel.  

          It's horrible, but no one should be surprised at the level of response from Israel.  It's what they always do, unfortunately.  But no one should be naive to think Hamas shouldn't or didn't expect Israel to escalate.  

          Israel is full of neocons and will always escalate.  

          Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek. Barack Obama

          by delphine on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 08:12:28 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  You know what? (7+ / 0-)

            There's some truth in what you say.

            Anyone who says anything that isn't hard-line anti-Israel is considered "pro-Israel
            Sometimes we in the Adalah camp are too quick to dismiss and criticize people who aren't as strongly pro-Palestinian as we want them to be. The impatience grows out of our feeling that, certain complexities notwithstanding, the issue at the center of this conflict is simple: one side is occupying the other. Still, it would be in our interest to try to politely persuade rather than castigate.

            But let me be clear, when I mentioned the small minority of reflexive "pro-Israel" commenters, I was referring not to people who are agnostic on this topic, or who don't take as strong a pro-Palestinian stance as I want them to, I was referring to Kossacks who, for example. enthusiastically support Israel's brutality and smear Jews who don't as Kapos.

            •  I have (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              JNEREBEL, Red Sox, hester

              never seen anyone here "enthusiastically supporting Israel's brutality" that wasn't immediately crushed by donuts and wiped off the thread, if not banned.

              A couple years ago there were maybe two of these folks, and they are no longer here.

              I won't go back over ground I've covered before, citing horrific anti-semitic screeds that were uprated by people who are still here.

              Anyone who goes off wholeheartedly in support of brutality should be hide rated and considered for banning.

              However, to be clear, saying "wow, I can understand [     ]'s reaction here" is NOT supporting brutality.

              I've had comments like "Oh, so you support the murder of Palestinian babies".  

              I have a pretty measured view on the mideast and have made it clear I abhor Israel's militarism, so there is no need for crap like that.

              Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek. Barack Obama

              by delphine on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 09:07:29 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Well I'm not a (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                corvo, Lefty Coaster

                a troll rater, but if you are, here's a comment from this thread that represents the POV I was talking about.

                It is almost impossible for the majority [of people on this site] to even acknowledge that civilians in Israel are being deliberately targeted for rocket attacks.

                They see nothing wrong with this kind of terrorism.

                •  Really? (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  JNEREBEL, Red Sox

                  this is your "enthusiastic support of brutality"?

                  (A)  The world sees rocket attacks as terrorism, because that is what it is.  Justified or not, lobbing bombs into another country aimed at civilians is terrorism, by definition.

                  (B)  The bombs are being lobbed into residential areas, ergo, they are deliberately targeting civilians

                  How in the world is that post remotely "enthusiastic support of brutality?"

                  It doesn't even say anything about responding.  It just says the facts:  bombs are being lobbed into civilian neighborhoods.  Regardless of any justification (the demand for liberation and an end to occupation), people are being terrorized by it.

                  Sheez, really?  You make my argument for me.

                  I mentioned to a friend the other day the abhorrent practice just revealed of Israel determining the minimum number of calories Palestinians need to survive and using this to limit food going into Gaza.  Just disgusting.

                  He said "Well, that sounds better than you think . . ."

                  See, he assumed that I was saying how wonderful Israel was for making sure the Palestinians got their minimum calories.  

                  And I was saying that limiting food going to Palestinians based on some "minimum" of caloric intake was simply barbaric.  No fucking excuse for it at all.  

                  He heard what he wanted to hear in what I said.  

                  I read that comment and see absolutely NOTHING to suggest this person "enthusiastically" supports any activity by Israel, let alone brutality.  It's a simple statement of fact.

                  The "Jews' souls are twisted and blackened" by the holocaust and therefore they are capable of barbarism comment, though, got uprated.  I'd say between the two comments, this is the vile one.

                  Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek. Barack Obama

                  by delphine on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 09:56:22 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Wow (6+ / 0-)

                    I didn't meant to say that the comment in question was cheering on Israel's brutality. I said it reflected the POV of the "pro-Israel' camp, which, among other views, holds that critics of Israel support Hamas.

                    You call this comment -- which says that most people on this site "see nothing wrong" with Hamas' terrorism -- a simple "statement of fact."

                    I agree that you shouldn't be smeared as a apologist for the killing of Palestinian babies; if you can't admit that people critical of Israel shouldn't be smeared as supporters of terrorism, then you're not arguing in good faith - then indeed, you're part of the problem.

                    •  The comment (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Red Sox

                      doesn't seem to say critics of Israel support Hamas or terrorism.

                      If the commenter had read the diary, s/he would see that it does indeed sort of condemn Hamas (although it says "If you're going to lob bombs, target military targets instead of civilians", which doesn't really condemn the lobbing of bombs into Israel in general).

                      I don't see the comment as smearing all people critical of Israel as supporting terrorism.

                      The writer doesn't see a recognition or condemnation of terrorism in the diary or thread.

                      Not the same thing.

                      Certainly not the same as "You support the killing of Palestinian babies!"

                      Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek. Barack Obama

                      by delphine on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 10:41:27 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  ? (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        callmecassandra
                        They see nothing wrong with this kind of terrorism.
                        Sorry, I mistook you for a reasonable commenter. Your defense of such a disgusting comment shows me otherwise. See ya later.
                      •  Nor as I stated was the comment meant to refer (0+ / 0-)

                        to the thread or diary but was rather an opinion on the general responses posted in the diaries as a whole since the latest outbreak of violence.

                        For that lack of specificity I erred, but my point is still valid in regards to the interactions and comments I have personally engaged in with others here.

                        •  Plus you didn't (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          JNEREBEL

                          accuse any one person.  It's an observation, not an accusation.

                          In addition, where in this diary does it categorically condemn all forms of terrorism?

                          It really bugs me to read "well, if you're going to bomb, at least target the military".

                          Really?  So there is "legitimate" terrorism?  Isn't bombing someone else's military an act of war?

                          Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek. Barack Obama

                          by delphine on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 01:18:48 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

        •  What is "pro-Israel" in this context, please? (7+ / 0-)

          There's a perpetual motion machine of violence which seems fomented between the major political rivals in the region being discussed here.  I see no white knights.

          So, I happen to despise much about Israel's political leadership and have for years, but I'm not otherwise "anti-Israel" in terms of their existence, for example.

          But similarly, I think Hamas is an opportunistic, selfish organization that makes the world a thousand times more difficult and tragic for the citizenry in whose midst they live, but I also support the Palestinians having an independent (i.e., unoccupied) state of their own, some day.

          Am I "pro-" or "anti-" Israel from the above, in your view?  Just wondering if my opinion here would be legitimatized or not before even posting.

          "So, please stay where you are. Don't move and don't panic. Don't take off your shoes! Jobs is on the way."

          by wader on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 08:30:25 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  It's not in the most literal sense. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            JNEREBEL, wader

            Clearly supporting the Likud government is not practically pro-Israel. Indeed, it harms Israel in the long run. But colloquially, "pro-Israel" means one who generally sides with Israel in the I/P conflict.

            FWIW, I consider myself pro-Israel and think of your stance as pro-Israel as well. The commenter you're replying to has a visceral hatred of the state, and even endorses anti-Semitic memes, so he might see things differently.

            Unapologetic Obama supporter.

            by Red Sox on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 01:01:38 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site