Skip to main content

View Diary: Behaving Like a Jew (187 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I don't understand the support for either of em. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    US Blues, corvo, Mindful Nature

    Isreal is obviously an aggressive, interventionist nuclear theocracy that wont comply with global nuclear weapons control treaties including the NNPT.

    The Palestinians clearly foment and support Hamas, Hezbolah, and other clearly understood terrorist groups.

    Why the United States has anything to do with either of these people is beyond my grasp. Neither of them have anything we need and both of them do nothing but make trouble.

    •  Israel developed and maintains (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      volleyboy1

      nuclear weapons as a deterrent and to defend itself. Considering that so many countries are hostile to Israel, why shouldn't they have these weapons?

      •  Well, international law? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        letsgetreal

        I mean shouldn't they comply with non proliferation treaties? Everyone wants nuclear weapons as a deterrant. But everyone can't have them because of international law.

        But on the issue of deterrance, they aren't on solid ground their either.

        There are no nuclear powers in the region that have ever aimed nuclear weapons at Israel. Secondly, the folks who could nuke Isreal (us..the Russians, the British the French, and the Chinese) have no interest in doing it and they couldn't stop us from doing it if we wanted to.

        And on the conventional front, Israel has already defeated every power that has ever attacked it. Decisively. They never needed a nuclear deterrant to do it either.

        So really, there is no real reason not to comply with the control treaties if there's nothing to hide. You aren't going to stop Hezbollah or Hamas with an ICBM.

        •  International law is not meant to be (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Kane in CA, volleyboy1

          a suicide pact.  Iran is developing nuclear weapons and has repeatedly threatened Israel--and given radical islamist ideology--wherein no non muslim state can exist in  a formerly muslim land--it's foolish for Israel to consider giving up it's nuclear weapons.

          •  What is to prevent (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            corvo

            Israel from joining the international protocols for tracking and accounting for fissile material?

          •  Who said anything about giving them up? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            whizdom, corvo

            The NNPT doesn't require you to not have nuclear weapons. We signed and we have them. The Russians signed it and they have them. In fact, the only countries that have not signed it are North Korea, Pakistan, and Isreal. Good company, right?

            Israeal can submit to normal monitoring by the IAEA just like every other nuclear power that isn't a rogue state. Just like we do and we have far more enemies than Israel. In fact, if Iran gets a nuclear weapon America is much more likely to get hit before Israel is.

            Totally with you on the Iran thing. But that's not an excuse not to comply with international law.

          •  No one said anything about "giving up" weapons (0+ / 0-)

            But Israel has refused to declare how many weapons it has or join a treaty. That's bullshit

            The civil rights, gay rights and women's movements, designed to allow others to reach for power previously grasped only by white men, have made a real difference, and the outlines of 21st century America have emerged. -- Paul West of LA Times

            by LiberalLady on Sun Nov 25, 2012 at 11:41:29 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  They haven't signed those treaties (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          AaronInSanDiego

          so, no, technically.

          Hay hombres que luchan un dia, y son buenos Hay otros que luchan un año, y son mejores Hay quienes luchan muchos años, y son muy buenos. Pero hay los que luchan toda la vida. Esos son los imprescendibles.

          by Mindful Nature on Sun Nov 25, 2012 at 08:32:14 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  I should have added the bioweapons and chemical (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        corvo

        weapons conventions as well. Israel hasn't committed to those either and US intelligence have long published their opinions that Israel has both a biological and a chemical weapons program.

      •  Against whom would Israel (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        protectspice

        use its nukes?  With the exception of Iran, all of the states Israel would be most likelky to go to war against are too close to Israel for the employment of nukes.  Unless Israelis are magically impervious to fallout, and I somehow doubt that's the case.

      •  This is a tired canard (0+ / 0-)

        Jordan is not an enemy of Israel, and neither is Egypt. If Israel can have nuclear weapons as a "deterrent", why can't Iran? Israel should declare its weapons  -- as every other nation with nukes has done.

        The civil rights, gay rights and women's movements, designed to allow others to reach for power previously grasped only by white men, have made a real difference, and the outlines of 21st century America have emerged. -- Paul West of LA Times

        by LiberalLady on Sun Nov 25, 2012 at 11:40:03 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Israel is no more a theocracy (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Kane in CA

      than we are. There are theocratic movements, just as in this country, but a higher percentage of Israelis are secular and non-religious, and since it is a parliamentary democracy, that matters.

      Since they are not signatories of the NNPT, they have no legal obligation to comply with it.

      As for the Palestinians, many of them support Hamas, and some support Islamic Jihad and other extremist groups (Hezbollah is primarily in Lebanon). But you are generalizing and painting with a broad brush. Many of them don't support the militant methods of Hamas or other groups.

      "Okay, until next time. Keep sending me your questions, and I will make fun of you... I mean, answer them." - Strong Bad

      by AaronInSanDiego on Sun Nov 25, 2012 at 09:35:53 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  None of it is any of our business in any case. (0+ / 0-)

        They do call themselves a Jewish State. A religious symbol is on their flag. Ones religion is a qualification for citizenship.

        The United States has none of these things.

        Any nantion with nuclear weapons that isn't signing the NNPT is a rogue state. The United States should not be doing normal diplomatic business with rogue states with nukes. Isreal should be kept at arms length much like  Pakistan.

        As for the Palestinians, it is perfectly clear that a significant enough chunk of them support known terrorist organizations to be able to make the safe generalization that these people support terrorism. The Isrealis didn't build massive walls around these peopel for there peaceful demonstrations Ghandi or Mandela style.

         But most importantly, the United States has no major economic or national security interest in what happens in that region, except as it relates to the relative safety of the Suez Canal and our TREATY ALLY Turkey.

        •  Jewish identity is ethnoreligious (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sfbob, mahakali overdrive

          in nature, meaning that there are both ethnic and religious aspects. Zionism was originally a form of ethnic nationalism, like many 19th century nationalist movements. Religious Zionism is more recent, and was not the main force behind the establishment of the State of Israel. The symbol is a Jewish symbol, but it is not explicitly religious, but tied to both a national myth and a religious myth. Nearly 25% of the population is non-Jewish, and a large percentage of those who identify as Jewish are non-religious. The Law of Return is not the only way to establish citizenship, AFAIK, and while the rules defining who is a Jew are religiously based (matrilineal decent, Orthodox conversion, etc.), a person doesn't have to personally subscribe to Judaism in order to qualify.

          Regarding the Palestinians, I think you have a similarly overly simplistic view.

          My point isn't to defend or condemn these things, but I felt that your comment was inaccurate.

          "Okay, until next time. Keep sending me your questions, and I will make fun of you... I mean, answer them." - Strong Bad

          by AaronInSanDiego on Sun Nov 25, 2012 at 11:07:41 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (114)
  • Community (52)
  • Memorial Day (27)
  • Culture (20)
  • Civil Rights (18)
  • Law (18)
  • Science (18)
  • Environment (17)
  • Rescued (17)
  • Labor (16)
  • Elections (15)
  • Marriage Equality (15)
  • Media (15)
  • Ireland (13)
  • Josh Duggar (13)
  • Economy (13)
  • Education (13)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (13)
  • Health Care (11)
  • Music (11)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site