Skip to main content

View Diary: The Goalposts are Moving in the Middle-East (I/P) - Support Senator Feinsteins Efforts for Peace (346 comments)

Comment Preferences

    •  OK, I'll support it. (7+ / 0-)

      But I don't understand why you are in favor of this boycott, which targets settlement products, but you were adamantly against the divestment resolution at Berkeley, which only targeted two American businesses that provided equipment for the Occupation.

      In both instances, ordinary, innocent Israelis were not targeted. Please, I really do want to understand your position.

      A guilty conscience never feels secure.

      by Flyswatterbanjo on Thu May 27, 2010 at 11:00:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'll take that one! (5+ / 0-)

        Settlement products are just that--they're 100% the fruit of illegal occupation.  Boycotting very large companies who do a negligible portion of their business with a sovereign state that happens to use their products in an illegal occupation is a big stretch.  So it's a proportionality thing.  

        This machine makes fascists feel bad. (Meteor Blades-approved version)

        by Rich in PA on Thu May 27, 2010 at 11:07:56 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I thought I was clear but apparently not (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Paul in Berkeley, livosh1, MBNYC, Red Sox

        The boycott by the ASUC targeted the IDF/IAF as a whole by urging divestment in the companies that supply Apache's and parts for self defense. Though those weapons were used in "Cast Lead", they are also used in general to defend Israel. Taking away from Israel's way to defend itself is a no-no for me. This action boycotts products specifically coming from the settlements and Occupation. It is very clear.

        Second though it had a "weak sauce" disclaimer at the end of it - it mentioned nothing affirming Israel's right to exist or to self defense. The Feinstein letter specifically speaks to that and Shalom Achshav is an Israeli group that supports Two-States. So... I can support their boycott of Settlement products.

        Finally despite the B.S. noise here I always said if the ASUC took out the clause on the IDF/IAF AND in the midst of their proclamations regarding Israel did this and that and had said they supported Israel's right to self defense and existence I would have supported the ASUC letter. But they did not so I could not.

        "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

        by volleyboy1 on Thu May 27, 2010 at 11:10:31 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  asdf (8+ / 0-)

          "Though those weapons were used in "Cast Lead", they are also used in general to defend Israel"

          Yeah, just like products made in the settlements raise revenue for the Israeli state, some of which is used "in general to defend Israel". So boycotting even 100% settlement-linked goods violates your standard too.

          •  Not really because the settlements (5+ / 0-)

            are a net revenue loser for Israel. As is the Occuparion. Sorry.

            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

            by volleyboy1 on Thu May 27, 2010 at 11:21:49 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Not sure how that's relevant. (8+ / 0-)

              If you're saying that short-term losses in Israeli tax revenues (and, therefore, for the funds used "in general to defend Israel") are worth it in order to contribute to ending the occupation, which will in the long-term increase the funds used to defend Israel (since settlements are a "net revenue loser"), fine.

              But, obviously, precisely the same argument can be made for boycotting anything to do with the IDF. Namely: that short-term losses in the ability of the IDF to function "in general to defend Israel" are worth it if, by inflicting those losses, one is contributing to an end to the occupation, which will in the long-term increase the IDF's ability to defend Israel (since settlements are a 'net security loser').

              Do you want another try?

              •  Nope I don't want another try. (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                livosh1, JNEREBEL, MBNYC

                thanks for the condesencion in response to an honest effort to explain.

                Here is a suggestion...you don't like this diary - write one blasting the letter and the Shalom Achshav effort. Give all your reasons there.

                As for your comment - Nope - the settlements and products are net losers from Day One. They get tax breaks over businesses in Israel proper. Simply put from day one they cost more than they bring in.

                "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                by volleyboy1 on Thu May 27, 2010 at 11:49:45 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  So boycott the Israeli government (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  corvo

                  and by extension the IDF.  You don't need Apache copters unless you think this is defense.

                   title=

                  I will vote, but always with a caution that voting is not crucial, and organizing is the important thing.

                  by General Choomin on Thu May 27, 2010 at 12:26:49 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Sorry I disagree..... (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    livosh1

                    General you and I just see thinga differently. You won't accept what I say and I won't accept what you are saying regarding boycotting the IDF. Sorry but we are at an impasse. What can I tell you.

                    "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                    by volleyboy1 on Thu May 27, 2010 at 12:31:40 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Perhaps I would accept what you say (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      corvo

                      If you didn't always dodge my questions.  See that's the trick with talking to others.  When you post your opinion you should always expect follow up questions.  If you refuse to even try to explain your position further by simply stating "I DISAGREE" without further explanation.  Then your opinion can't really stand on it's own two feet.

                      I explain and answer your questions.  Yet you don't offer me the same curtsy.  I just posted a picture of an Apache attack on civilians.  You see the same thing as me but state "Sorry I disagree.....".  You then say

                      General you and I just see thinga differently

                      When the picture we both see of an Apache attack is the same.  It is an Apache attack and neither you nor I are blind.  How do we see the same thing "differently"?

                      Why would Israel need Apaches?  How much weapons does a nation of "6 million" need?  Or do they need so many weapons to keep in check the other 6 million that live in it's occupied umbrella?  

                      I will vote, but always with a caution that voting is not crucial, and organizing is the important thing.

                      by General Choomin on Thu May 27, 2010 at 12:48:38 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Gen. I am not ducking your questions (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        livosh1, JNEREBEL, Dom9000

                        You phrase posts and responses in a way that I don't agree with and you say things that I simply don't accept as true the way you put them.

                        So you showed an Apache attack. If I were in Israel I would want one of those defending me.

                        Just take this phrase:

                        Why would Israel need Apaches?  How much weapons does a nation of "6 million" need?  Or do they need so many weapons to keep in check the other 6 million that live in it's occupied umbrella?

                        They need as many as they need to keep them safe and powerful. I mean what kind of question is that. Look at the way you phrased it.

                        Your questions and rhetoric are so loaded and you are so insulting in my opinion that I simply don't want to deal. Pretty much that should sum it up.

                        I can't even begin to discuss things with you because we see things completely differently. I understand you have an opinion and that is great but I don't share your opinion. Pretty much that is that.

                        "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                        by volleyboy1 on Thu May 27, 2010 at 12:58:01 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  This is going to go line by line. (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          corvo

                          You phrase posts and responses in a way that I don't agree with and you say things that I simply don't accept as true the way you put them.

                          Ignore the "phrasing" and answer the content of my questions.  Saying that you don't agree with or can't accept my statements as true even in direct questions is another excuse to me.  I have multiple times asked direct and none controversial questions in which you refused to answer.  I am not asking you to play semantics games.  I am asking you for answers and discourse.

                          So you showed an Apache attack. If I were in Israel I would want one of those defending me.

                          You aren't in Israel and that picture is in no way what anyone would call "defense".

                          They need as many as they need to keep them safe and powerful. I mean what kind of question is that. Look at the way you phrased it.

                          You don't explain why they need it to "keep them safe".  I guess you partially answered my question when you said "powerful".  When you ask "what kind of question is that".  I can only respond by saying that it's a real one.  If you don't like my "phrasing" then address the content of it.  As I said, I'm not here to play semantics games.

                          Your questions and rhetoric are so loaded and you are so insulting in my opinion that I simply don't want to deal. Pretty much that should sum it up.

                          I am rather blunt.  But I try to be respectful to those that reciprocate it back.  Even when it's not mutual I still try to be respectful.  Don't tell me my questions are "so loaded and insulting".  Because i've been insulted personally so many times in these diaries by you and others that you shouldn't even bring it up.

                          When I ask questions, please try to answer them.  I try to be respectful in these diaries as much as humanly possible.  But when people have meta conversations which consist of insulting me and others.  Well, that doesn't help.  Just like the one you had with Paul in this very diary.  As well as countless other meta discussions in various diaries.  You say I insult you with my questions yet you enable as well as insult me with such meta drivel.  

                          My questions and rhetoric are not as loaded as you say anyways.  Just asking your opinion on Finklestein or Chomsky gets you into full dodge mode.  Saying I ask "loaded" question that are insulting is not true.  As I have interacted with you many times before.  I even uprate you when I agree with you and vice versa.  

                          I can't even begin to discuss things with you because we see things completely differently.


                          How do we see things completely differently?  You don't explain that.  Hell that's the excuse you use to not explain it.  

                          I understand you have an opinion and that is great but I don't share your opinion. Pretty much that is that.

                          Yes, I have an opinion.  It is great that I have an opinion.  It is also great that you have an opinion.  The problem here is that I can't ask questions about your opinion.  Which makes it hard for me to even know what your opinion is.  

                          I will vote, but always with a caution that voting is not crucial, and organizing is the important thing.

                          by General Choomin on Thu May 27, 2010 at 01:37:27 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Read my diaries - that is my opinion (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            livosh1

                            I type it everyday here. What do you want to know? I don't agree with you on this issue (I/P) and I see things differently. So? You asked a question regarding Apaches. I think Iarael needs them to defend itself - you don't. We disagree

                            Frankly, the way you phrase things is key in a discussion. I do uprate you at times when we do agree and I agree vice versa. But in general I have a tough time with your line of questioning because I object to the question itself. I won't answer it because the question alone does not lend itself to discussion.

                            You asked me about Apaches - I answered. You are not changing my mind. So just accept that is my opinon. You are certainly welcome to disagree but your response doesn't warrant any change.

                            Just ask the question free of rhetoric and you will find me more willing to answer.

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Thu May 27, 2010 at 01:52:28 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  *sigh* (3+ / 0-)

                            How do we see things completely differently?  You don't explain that.  Hell, that's the excuse you use to not explain it.  

                            I will vote, but always with a caution that voting is not crucial, and organizing is the important thing.

                            by General Choomin on Thu May 27, 2010 at 03:10:24 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                •  I didn't say I didn't like the diary (9+ / 0-)

                  I responded directly to your arguments about why Feinstein's letter was worth supporting. That's what the comment threads are meant to be for, right?

                  Sorry for the mild condescension, but people, including myself, have pointed out the logical flaws of your argument against the ASUC boycott motion several times, and we've pointed out your failure to apply it consistently (which would mean opposing any attempt to stop financing the military of any country ever), and you've never deigned to make a substantive response.

                  •  I actually think I make many substantive (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    livosh1, AlexanderHamilton

                    responses. You just don't seem to accept them. Sorry but I get frustrated by that. I don't say you should agree with them - we see the world different ways and we see this conflict in different ways.

                    I feel I have been very substantive. But I don't agree with how you see thingd. Fair enough.

                    "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                    by volleyboy1 on Thu May 27, 2010 at 02:08:30 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

        •  ok, thanks for the answer. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          livosh1, volleyboy1, canadian gal

          A guilty conscience never feels secure.

          by Flyswatterbanjo on Thu May 27, 2010 at 01:00:30 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Hm. Seems things have changed in these (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Tomsank, Friendlystranger

      type of diaries, I thought you were one of the defenders of Israel's actions.

      Been a while since I have read an I-P diary, I like the change.

    •  you've inspired me, letters letters letters (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      volleyboy1

      Dear Senator Feinstein,

      I'm writing regarding your letter to Secretary Clinton applauding both the Obama Administration and Netanyahu for their efforts towards negotiations and urging her to pressure President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad to reciprocate.

      Your letter appeared 5 or 6 days after the Wall Street Jouranl reported "Palestinians Offer Wider Concessions on Land"

      "   Palestinian negotiators have surprised Washington with a bold opening offer...Palestinians told Mr. Mitchell they are prepared to match offers that they made to former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert during peace negotiations in 2008, and may be willing to double the amount of West Bank land to be included in a land swap, according to the officials briefed on the negotiations. "

      As my representative I would appreciate you amending your letter to include praise and acknowlegment for  Palestinians and their negotiators by making this magnanimous offer, lest one simply might assume you weren't paying attention.

      Sincerely,

      contact Feinstein

      to the WH contact (i'm always writing them)

      It has come to my attention Feinstein has written a letter to Sec Clinton applauding the Administration and Netanyahu for their efforts towards negotiations urging her to pressure President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad to reciprocate, neither of which she applauded.

      Please inform Sec Clinton due to the report a week ago in the WSJ titled  "Palestinians Offer Wider Concessions on Land" I think Palestinian Negotiators should also be applauded for their efforts. The WSJ reports:

      "   Palestinian negotiators have surprised Washington with a bold opening offer...Palestinians told Mr. Mitchell they are prepared to match offers that they made to former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert during peace negotiations in 2008, and may be willing to double the amount of West Bank land to be included in a land swap, according to the officials briefed on the negotiations. "

      It's a generous offer and should be acknowledged as such.

      Thank you for all the work you are doing towards resolution of this matter and send my regards to Mitchell.

      touche!

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (160)
  • Community (83)
  • Baltimore (80)
  • Freddie Gray (59)
  • Bernie Sanders (58)
  • Civil Rights (51)
  • Elections (40)
  • Culture (36)
  • Hillary Clinton (33)
  • Media (33)
  • 2016 (29)
  • Racism (29)
  • Law (29)
  • Education (25)
  • Labor (25)
  • Environment (24)
  • Politics (23)
  • Republicans (23)
  • Barack Obama (21)
  • Police (19)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site