Skip to main content

View Diary: Israel Shells Another UN School Housing Refugees, 19+ Killed. Bombs Market During Ceasefire. (677 comments)

Comment Preferences

    •  America supported the Iraq War for years (7+ / 0-)

      The Iraq War was far more egregious on pretty much every level (number of innocents killed, tortured, injured based on fake evidence and no actual threat)

      So wondering why America isn't reacting to Israel's response to Hamas's weapons and underground tunnel construction is silly.

      Israel faces an actual threat. We didn't.

      Argue that Netanyahu's offensive is out of control, reckless, and with a sick indifference to the death of innocents, and I will agree with you.  I find no way to justify this level of killing no matter what the threat is from Hamas. This can and should have been done with far more restraint, regardless of Hamas's techniques of warfare.

      But to act like the United States would suddenly be outraged because of what Israel does, when this country spent a decade blowing up Vietnam and another decade blowing up Iraq, is pretty disingenuous.

      •  WinSmith: As murderous and destructive as the (38+ / 0-)

        was, it was a real war, in that the "insurgents" had the capability to fight back in a serious way.
         Moreover, Iraqis at least had the possibility of fleeing the fighting.
           The US never deliberately targeted the refugees.
           The people of Gaza are completely helpless against Israeli power. The much vaunted Hamas rockets are hopelessly ineffective. The Gazans have no capability to materially harm Israel.
           The Gazans have no place to go, and they are being systematically slaughtered.
           This is not war. It is mass murder.

           Does anyone really believe that Israel is blowing up UN shelters and hospitals by accident? That's a lot of damn accidents.
           In this particular episode of the ongoing genocide, Israel has killed roughly one out of every thousand  Gaza residents.
           Scale that up to, say, Kent State University. Does anyone remember the horror and outrage when four students were killed?
          If the Ohio National Guard were doing what Israel is doing, there would have been forty dead students.
           Scale it to the destruction of the World Trade Center.
           Imagine that attack leaving 300,000 dead.
           We sympathize with the American veterans who suffer from PTSD. What do we think happens when a whole population watches their homes destroyed, their children murdered or crippled, the air filled with the stench of rotting bodies, the air toxic from burning fuel ?
           And this is the 3rd time in seven years that this horror has been inflicted on those poor people.

           American actions in Vietnam and Iraq were deplorable, and I demonstrated against both those wars.
           But bad actions by America in the past doesn't excuse the genocidal slaughter of women and children by the Israelis.

        •  "mass murder" (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JNEREBEL, AlexDrew, Dburn

          You abuse history when you use a term like that after Israel killed 1,200 people in a country of 1.6 million people.

          You write this is the "3rd time in seven years that this horror has been inflicted on these poor people."

          You mention Hamas zero times.

          You act as if daily missiles fired into Israel are something Israel should just deal with and accept.

          Your position is ludicrous.

          No country would live with missiles being fired into their country every day, crude or not.  It is unacceptable.

          Hamas's terror campaign, even if it kills zero people, could make areas of Israel unlivable as people move inland to escape the harrassment.  

          What country can live like this?

          None.

          •  Even if you believed all of that (30+ / 0-)

            how Is Israeli killing of children creating fewer 'terrorists' than more? In the long run this just does more harm than good, just like our failed 'war on terror' that has unsettled the middle east and allowed groups like ISIS to thrive?

            If you stand for nothing you will fall for anything.

            by LieparDestin on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 09:04:38 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  There's not an argument to have... (5+ / 0-)

              ...there.

              Win's arguing against dallasdunlap's apparent argument that what Bibi is doing is unprovoked mass murder.  He's even admitted (as would anyone reasonable at this point) that the IDF response is far, far too much.  But it's silly to not recognize provocation when it's as plain as day.

              I think we all agree that Israel's response has gone too far.  But there are some that argue that Israel has no right to respond to rockets being launched into Israeli territory, which is as silly an argument as one that says that the current Israeli response isn't literally overkill.

              Everyday Magic
              Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
              -- Clarke's Third Law

              by The Technomancer on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 09:22:56 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I am one of them (8+ / 0-)
                But there are some that argue that Israel has no right to respond to rockets being launched into Israeli territory, which is as silly an argument as one that says that the current Israeli response isn't literally overkill.
                I could explain to you why but I fear it would a waste of time.

                Just a question if ypu don't mind.

                Do you consider Israeli territory any place where an Israeli Jew has decided to make his home and settle on land that does not belong to him?

                •  The better question to define the terms... (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  JNEREBEL, WinSmith

                  ...of any discussion we have if you're disputing that the territory is Israel's to defend is "What territory do you feel Israel has the right to defend, if any?"

                  Not because I'm trying to be an ass, but because it'll save us both plenty of time and frustration to understand where the other is coming from.

                  Everyday Magic
                  Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
                  -- Clarke's Third Law

                  by The Technomancer on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 09:56:13 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I think I'd like Israel to define that for me. (4+ / 0-)

                    Where are Israel's borders, exactly?

                    The Empire never ended.

                    by thejeff on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 10:39:00 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  It's pretty clear... (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      WinSmith

                      ...where Israel considers them to be, and Euroliberal is pretty clear he disagrees with Israel on them.  Which is why I asked what land should be considered Israel's for such a discussion.

                      I'm an Aspie.  I prefer being direct over asking leading questions because I'm fairly terrible at putting myself in someone else's thought processes.  Feel free to call bullshit on me if you ever see me doing/acting otherwise.

                      Fair enough?

                      Everyday Magic
                      Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
                      -- Clarke's Third Law

                      by The Technomancer on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 10:48:24 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  No, that's not fair (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Pablo Bocanegra, KJG52, onionjim
                        Fair enough?
                        Because my question was not leading at all. It was as straightforward as it can be.

                        Unless you are dishonest, the answer was easy.

                        You do know that settling and confiscation is going on on a daily basis. So, why do you pretend that it is legally or ethically ok to claim that land you might steal a month from now automatically becomes territory that should be defended?

                        •  Quote where I claimed it. (0+ / 0-)

                          As I'm sure you know, the rocket range from the West Bank includes disputed territories where Israel probably shouldn't be settling as well as internationally recognized Israeli territory.  We probably agree on whether certain parts of what Israel considers Israel isn't theirs to defend.  Hence my question -- my agreement or disagreement with your overall position depends on what borders you think Israel has the right to defend.  It's not to be a dick or paint you into a corner.

                          If you feel like answering my question so I know how to respond to you rather than just project what I'd like to argue against onto you, then there's a discussion to be had here.

                          Otherwise, there's plenty of other people you can go be upset at over things they didn't say.

                          Everyday Magic
                          Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
                          -- Clarke's Third Law

                          by The Technomancer on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 11:20:27 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  I have no problem answering (0+ / 0-)

                            anything you might want to ask.

                            You are smart enough. You know there are at least two parties in this dispute.

                            So.... Israel deciding, by decree or by force, "disputing" by itself what is or isn't part of their territories I don't consider the standard by which I base my opinions.

                            Wouldn't it be fair to accept what the Palestinians consider to be Israel's territory and borders? Equally valid, yes?

                            I'd take the '67 borders for example.

                            What International body or Treaty gave Israel anymore than that?

                          •  Since we're talking about Palestinians here.. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            WinSmith

                            I like your suggestion of what the Palestinians consider to be Palestine -- so the 1949/50 Armistice lines (represented by the green lines on this map).

                            I don't believe I implied that what Israel considers their land is what you considered Israel's land, or that it should have any bearing on your decision.  My apologies if my lack of eloquence seemed to imply that.  That was not my intent.  The intent of that statement was to point out that obviously, Israel feels their land is under attack from Hamas rockets, and your original reply to me seemed to get the point across that you didn't feel said land was Israel's.

                            Shit, this might just be a case of crossed communication wires on our part.  Anyway...

                            Every rocket (as far as I can tell, please correct me if I'm wrong) that Hamas as fired into Israel has been at land that the Palestinian Authority and the Oslo Accords recognize as Israeli land.

                            Now, given that your original response to my statement of...

                            But there are some that argue that Israel has no right to respond to rockets being launched into Israeli territory, which is as silly an argument as one that says that the current Israeli response isn't literally overkill.
                            ..was this, which I read to imply that you felt that the area that Hamas was rocketing shouldn't be considered Israeli land (and again, please correct me if I am wrong, I do not want to misrepresent your position)...
                            I am one of them

                            I could explain to you why but I fear it would a waste of time.

                            Just a question if ypu don't mind.

                            Do you consider Israeli territory any place where an Israeli Jew has decided to make his home and settle on land that does not belong to him?

                            So at this point, since we're in agreement on what lines represent Israel and what represents Palestine, and the Hamas rockets in question have been aimed at Israeli land according to said map and not occupied Palestinian land, I'm unsure if we actually disagree for the purposes of this discussion, since I believe we're in agreement that an Israeli response to rockets landing in their territory can be considered a defense response, and I believe we're in agreement that there's no way in hell what the IDF is doing to Gaza can be considered a defensive response anymore.

                            Do I have anything wrong here?

                            Everyday Magic
                            Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
                            -- Clarke's Third Law

                            by The Technomancer on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 11:59:53 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Sorry (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            jrooth, Emmy
                            I believe we're in agreement that an Israeli response to rockets landing in their territory can be considered a defense
                            sadly we are not.

                            The "rockets" are just a smokescreen to strip the discussion of any context.

                            If you think we agree then, you must concede that any settler or settlement outside the borders we just agreed seemed reasonable should not enjoy the right of self defense. If that's the case, let me know what you think would happen if Hamas or any other group attacks them.

                            Israel has "defended" itself ruthlessly against rocks, bombs, peaceful demonstrations or for the simple crime of being a Palestinian. Over and over again.

                          •  No, I'm fairly sure... (0+ / 0-)

                            ..that said rockets are very real things landing in territory we both agree is Israeli.  Your question about what I would think would happen if Hamas attacked their own land is asking me to be a mind-reader rather than evaluating the facts we have at hand.

                            If you're able to read minds, good for you.  I don't have that ability or a Minority Report machine to do it for me.

                            I've got no quarrel with the idea that Israel has overdone defensive responses both now and in the past.  Israel's even fired on peaceful demonstrations, and that's definitely not self defense.

                            As far as rocks go?  Next time you're in SF, let me know.  I'll take you out for a beer, you can feel the dent on the back of my head that represents the scar from a thrown rock, and I can tell you about how I damn near bled out from it.

                            If you expect bombs and rockets and such to not get a serious response no matter how righteous the cause of the bomber is, then I'm not sure we have anything left to discuss there.  I'm not sympathetic to the idea that any form of violence is a legitimate protest.

                            Everyday Magic
                            Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
                            -- Clarke's Third Law

                            by The Technomancer on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 12:37:14 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  you are deliberately (0+ / 0-)

                            complicating.

                            If you're able to read minds, good for you.  I don't have that ability or a Minority Report machine to do it for me.
                            Why isn't past behavior good enough for you?

                            The fact that you bring up your personal experience being hit by a rock tells me that you seem to things very superficially.
                            Excuse the sarcasm but, the rocks that hurt so much hit inside Israel's borders and needed a response to keep Israel safe?

                      •  It's pretty clear? (0+ / 0-)

                        It's not at all clear to me.

                        I don't disagree with Israel on them. Well, I might, but I don't know if I do, because I don't know where they are.

                        Do they include all the settlements in the West Bank and all the roads and other connections between them? Are they fixed? Do they include more West Bank land as the settlements grow? Do the borders just include all of the West Bank, maybe Gaza too?

                        The Empire never ended.

                        by thejeff on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 11:49:19 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  I asked my question as a response... (0+ / 0-)

                          ...to Euroliberal, whom I read (and possibly incorrectly, wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong) to be disputing that Israel had the right to respond to Hamas attacks based on the fact that what was being attacked by Hamas wasn't Israeli land.

                          I don't think we disagree on the idea that Israel's settlement policy is a bad idea at best, and criminal at worst.

                          Everyday Magic
                          Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
                          -- Clarke's Third Law

                          by The Technomancer on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 12:03:16 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                •  How many other nations do you believe have no (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  AlexDrew, WinSmith

                  right to defend itself when attacked?

                  Please list each for us.

                  Thanks!

                  "Stay close to the candles....the staircase can be treacherous" (-8.38,-8.51)

                  by JNEREBEL on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 10:03:48 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  I think it would be easier (26+ / 0-)

                to argue self-defense against rocket attacks, if a rocket attack was the sole- precursor to the current events. If a rocket had hit a home or a hospital in Israel causing 5-10-15 deaths, then there would probably be a lot less argument coming from some of us about the 'missile' attacks. However this was all ginned up about the 3 kids who were killed, and boogeyman kidnapping of civilians via secret tunnels. Sure there could be a threat from the tunnels, but there are certainly different ways of handling them.

                If you stand for nothing you will fall for anything.

                by LieparDestin on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 09:33:01 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Okay. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  LieparDestin

                  Even rockets the Iron Dome intercepts are disruptive.  Shelter has to be taken because Iron Dome isn't 100% effective and shrapnel from the overhead explosion when it is still rains down.

                  Rockets were flying well before this current offensive.  That is the clear threat from the tunnels -- those rockets got into Gaza via that method.

                  I think we agree that there are better ways of handling tunnels.  We agree that the Israeli actions are way beyond a legitimate response to the Hamas threat.  I feel that Israel had sufficient provocation to initiate a military response, but not anywhere near the level of destruction and killing we're seeing.

                  What's your opinion that last sentence?

                  Everyday Magic
                  Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
                  -- Clarke's Third Law

                  by The Technomancer on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 09:52:14 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I think there were a lot of other ways to handle (4+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    The Technomancer, onionjim, Emmy, Lepanto

                    It than militarily. People Are too quick to go to war instead of tring peace. Israel's approach with its Clean Break Strategy ( google it) has been to foster unrest  and the right of 'hot pursuit' into Gaza for years. I think it's more of the Bush Doctrine.

                    If you stand for nothing you will fall for anything.

                    by LieparDestin on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 10:18:26 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  No disagreement on the idea... (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      LieparDestin, AlexDrew

                      ...that there are better ways to handle it and that the military shouldn't be the first choice.  But I also think it's a fair statement to say that a limited military response is pretty much a foregone conclusion when any country is faced with a guerrilla war/insurgency (whether or not it should be), with most countries both recently and throughout history doing far more than just a limited response, our own country included.

                      Also, the Clean Break approach is a neocon fever dream, and is a Bibi policy, not Israeli policy -- governments in between the Netanyahu-led governments pushed for the agreements of the Oslo accords to be met.  Again, I think we're in agreement that Netanyahu's a fundamentalist, rightist scumbag.

                      This is when I remind people that Likud and Hamas are both pretty terrible, and they both rely on the threat of the other to stay in power.  Frankly, it's why I don't see what's happening in Gaza as a genocide -- for the very cynical reason that Netanyahu is very calculating, and he needs Hamas to continue to be a threat to maintain power.  Plus, in my personal opinion, Israel would need to be assaulting West Bank Palestinians as well to term it a genocide rather than a political conflict.  That's just my opinion though.

                      Everyday Magic
                      Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
                      -- Clarke's Third Law

                      by The Technomancer on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 10:38:27 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  What you're saying is ... (6+ / 0-)

                    why don't those damn Palestinians just curl up and die? If they don't like having their land stolen for Israeli settlement, tough shit. If they don't like being blockaded and sanctioned and besieged, tough shit. After all, they're only Arabs. Right?

                    Corporations, which should be the carefully restrained creatures of the law and the servants of the people, are fast becoming the people’s masters. -- President Grover Cleveland, 1888

                    by edg on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 10:46:23 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Quote where I've said that... (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      AlexDrew

                      ...or even implied it.

                      Here, I'll save you the time and link you to my comments, and unless I'm mistaken, all of my Israel/Palestine related comments are on that first page.  Needless to say, I doubt you'll find anything I've said that even remotely resembles the bullshit you've just posted, which as ridiculous as it is, isn't even the most ridiculous thing you've posted this week.

                      Now, if you'd like to start over and actually ask for my opinion on something so we can discuss things like adults, please do.  Otherwise, don't project your feelings on me, dude.  I'd appreciate it.  Thanks.

                      Everyday Magic
                      Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
                      -- Clarke's Third Law

                      by The Technomancer on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 10:56:31 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Your comment ... (6+ / 0-)
                        I feel that Israel had sufficient provocation to initiate a military response
                        To paraphrase, Palestine has no right to self-defense. No right to keep their land. No right to attack those who wish to invade and occupy their territory. Israel is the innocent party here. Amiright?

                        To see how silly you are, you link to my diary from over a month ago and say "most ridiculous thing you've posted this week". You don't even know how to read dates and tell time. Sad.

                        Corporations, which should be the carefully restrained creatures of the law and the servants of the people, are fast becoming the people’s masters. -- President Grover Cleveland, 1888

                        by edg on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 11:29:21 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  My bad on the dates. (0+ / 0-)

                          Got nothin' for that.  Misread JUN as JUL. Thanks for pointing that out.  Letter swapping like that is a very annoying reading disability that happens too often for my liking and has my whole life.

                          As far as the quoted comment goes, no, that's not a paraphrase of what I said.  Again, if you'd like to argue about that, find someone making that argument and try not to dicksplain to me what you think I think and why I'm bad for not thinking what you think I think.

                          Now, if you actually give a shit about what I think instead of trying to find people to rail against because you think they're thinking bad, bad thoughts that they aren't thinking, here it is:

                          Palestine has the right to self-defense.

                          Israel has the right to self-defense.

                          Israel had sufficient provocation to initiate a military operation on Gaza (assuming it's not ginned up, which is a possibility).

                          Israel has overdone said military operation to the point of war crimes.

                          However, even thought we agree that Palestine has the right to defend itself, if you can show me a viable path to anything resembling a victory condition for Hamas that involves weapons, I'm interested in seeing it.  Even though they have the right to do what they feel they need to defend their territory, there's also something to be said for recognizing when you are at a severe military disadvantage and that there's no way said strategy will go well for you.  

                          It's not approval of the Israeli response, it's just fact.  It's not fair, but it is what it is.

                          Everyday Magic
                          Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
                          -- Clarke's Third Law

                          by The Technomancer on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 12:18:50 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  What you think? (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Lepanto
                            Israel had sufficient provocation to initiate a military operation on Gaza
                            How did you reach that thought? Here is a rough timeline of recent events:

                            1. Rogue, possibly but not proved Hamas-affiliated thugs allegedly kidnap and kill 3 Israeli teenagers in the occupied West Bank.

                            2. Israel launches an attack on the West Bank, kills two dozen Palestinians, some belonging to Hamas (remembering that the West Bank is ruled by the PA, not Hamas), arrests 800 other Palestinians, and conducts a massive retaliation campaign to "bring our boys back alive" by destroying homes and businesses even though the Israeli government knows the boys were killed the very day they were kidnapped.

                            3. To express outrage at the treatment their West Bank brethren are receiving at the hands of the Israelis, Hamas elements in Gaza fire rockets into Israel.

                            4. Israel responds with a massive rocket and bomb attack on Gaza, killing 1,300 to date.

                            5. Hamas occasionally fires rockets into Israel in self-defense and has killed more than 50 IDF members in self-defense.

                            Corporations, which should be the carefully restrained creatures of the law and the servants of the people, are fast becoming the people’s masters. -- President Grover Cleveland, 1888

                            by edg on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 12:49:21 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  And... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            rduran

                            ...your timeline is a bit too rough on the details.

                            The West Bank operation was aimed at Hamas and Hamas leadership that resided in the West Bank.  PA forces weren't engaged, to my knowledge.

                            In response to an action that should have been a police action if we weren't talking about two sets of rightist, fundamentalist leaderships supported by a fraction of the population they lead/represent, Hamas started firing rockets to protest the fact that their Hamas (not Palestinian in this case, but because they belong to Hamas) brethren are arrested.

                            5 can't be self-defense after 3 happens, unless you expect there to be no retaliation for that.  I don't have a problem with considering 3 an act of self-defense, if an unwise one given the chasm that exists between Hamas' ability to project force into Israel and Israel's ability to project force into Palestine.

                            There's no argument in my mind that the magnitude of Israeli response in Gaza is a war crime.  I still question why Hamas leadership would seek to escalate matters.  Not because they don't have the right, but because it seems ridiculous to pick a fight with an entity that not only seriously overpowers you militarily, but has shown the willingness to act in a ruthless manner to ensure their security.

                            Which brings me back to the last paragraph in my previous post:

                            However, even thought we agree that Palestine has the right to defend itself, if you can show me a viable path to anything resembling a victory condition for Hamas that involves weapons, I'm interested in seeing it.  Even though they have the right to do what they feel they need to defend their territory, there's also something to be said for recognizing when you are at a severe military disadvantage and that there's no way said strategy will go well for you.  

                            It's not approval of the Israeli response, it's just fact.  It's not fair, but it is what it is.

                            Everyday Magic
                            Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
                            -- Clarke's Third Law

                            by The Technomancer on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 01:06:52 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  5 is a response to 4. (0+ / 0-)

                            You seemed to have leaped right over that one.

                            Corporations, which should be the carefully restrained creatures of the law and the servants of the people, are fast becoming the people’s masters. -- President Grover Cleveland, 1888

                            by edg on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 01:26:39 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  4 seems to be a fairly obvious... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            rduran

                            ...response to 3.  At this point, it's a mutual conflict -- very hard for me to consider either side as acting in self defense once they've escalated.

                            Everyday Magic
                            Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
                            -- Clarke's Third Law

                            by The Technomancer on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 02:05:38 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

              •  Exactly (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                AlexDrew

                In a larger sense, I'm arguing against the good/evil simplicities that rotted this country when they came from the right wing and are no more excusable when coming from the left.

                This is a very complex issue.

                When one paints it into simplicities, one does a disservice to any attempts to understand or help.

                Just like it was true Saddam Hussein was an evil piece of shit, but it was equally true that invading Iraq would have made things worse.

                The right screamed "If you oppose the Iraq War, you love Saddam Hussein!"  You can see the same sort of false binary (if you recognize Hamas is threatening Israel, and Israel has a right to respond, you support the massacre of innocent children!) all over these threads.

          •  Damn, lost TU status so can't hide-rate you (24+ / 0-)

            If Israel had withdrawn its illegal occupation of Palestine, rather than continue to build settlements there, against all international law, you'd have moral ground to stand on. If Israel weren't continuing to divert Palestinian water to its own settlements, and continuing to chop down Palestian olive groves that have been tended by the same families for centuries, you'd have a point. If Israel weren't continuously sabatoging all peace negotations, you'd have a point. If Israel hadn't turned Gaza into the world's largest prison, you'd have a point.

            As it is, the Palestinians have every right to self-defense. And you have members of the Israeli government frankly calling for the expulsion of all Palestinians from Gaza.

            Yes, firing on civilians is a war crime. Both sides need to stop. Especially the one which is more effectively killing them. With weapons largely funded and provided by America. Shamefully.

            Also, I'm not fucking anti-Semitic in commenting on this. I'm a Zionist myself. I believe in the right of Israel to exist, within the '67 borders. I also believe in the right of America to exist, despite the displaced Native Americans. But in both cases, both Israel and America owe far more to those whose land we have stolen. And in the 21st Century, no nation any longer should be tolerated when it steals land. Nor are war crimes committed by 1st World forces more foregivable than those committed by less-well-armed forces. They should be far less so.

            Israel is destroying itself, morally, with the blood of the innocent children it kills. As a Zionist, I am deeply saddened.

          •  Israel has killed much more than 1,200 people (11+ / 0-)

            Wim, in operation Cast Lead and in the current massacre number of children killed  is closer to 3,000. Also no one know  how many other thousands will continue to die as a result of the massive humanitarian and human right violations by Israel.

            In the USA, 20 children were killed in the December 2012 Sandy Hook shooting (we don't call shootings massacres in the US) and in the Hartford Courant there has been a story of those horrible killings virtually every day since. We take the killings of children seriously when done in America.

            Is it racism in Congress when the killing of 5o times that many children is done and ignored in Palestine. Comparing the deaths in Gaza to those in Iraq to justify the criminal killing of all Palestinian children is shameful.

            War is costly. Peace is priceless!

            by frostbite on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 10:38:37 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  100k innocent civilians couldn't fight back (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Emmy

          in Iraq. So that many or mire died. And insurgents hid among them. There are insurgents in thus case too capable if fighting back. They are firing rockets and their leaders hide safe underground.

          That war and this are more analagous than you think. I don't see how 100k civilians many women and children plenty dead in their sleep makes our conduct in Iraq more of a "real war". We didn't see the daily slaughter of civilians much. We didn't see the maimed screaming bleeding children like we are now. Iraq war was sanitized...Bush wouldn't even let us see our dead servicemembers caskets arrive home.

      •  WinSmith, your comment is silly. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Richard Villiers, Emmy, Lepanto

        The US spent ten years killing a couple hundred thousand Iraqis. At the rate Israel is killing Palestinians, they will exceed that toll within one year.

        Corporations, which should be the carefully restrained creatures of the law and the servants of the people, are fast becoming the people’s masters. -- President Grover Cleveland, 1888

        by edg on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 10:40:26 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Agreed. (6+ / 0-)

      Every American is directly responsible for every death in Gaza.

      When federal income taxes are deducted from your weekly/biweekly/semi-monthly paycheck, it's comforting to realize that about US$3.5 billion is given to the ultimate Welfare Queen -- Israel -- for weapons.

      And we wonder why they hate us. I'm starting to suspect it's not because they are jealous of our free-dumbs.

      One wonders when the Final Solution to the Palestinian Question will come to fruition.

      History has taught me a valuable lesson: Genghis Khan but Immanuel Kant.

      by Metro99 on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 09:32:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site