Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Friday, August 01, 2014

OT: Politics, August 2014: DNC criticizes Christie’s economic record with baseball video

As Gov. Chris Christie prepares to cap off his trip to New Hampshire tonight with a fundraiser at a minor-league baseball game, the Democratic National Committee has released a online video taking a swing at the Republican governor’s handling of New Jersey’s economy.

The clip is modeled after an old-time newsreel — the kind that would have been shown in movie houses when Babe Ruth ruled the baseball diamond in the 1920s.

It notes that under Christie — a possible candidate for the Republican nomination for president in 2016 — New Jersey has among the highest property taxes and slowest job growth in the U.S.

“On his economic record, Chris Christie strikes out,” the video’s narrator says.

Bitter Mouse Posted: August 01, 2014 at 09:10 AM | 6359 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: new jersey, politics, video

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 17 of 64 pages ‹ First  < 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 >  Last ›
   1601. JE (Jason) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:10 AM (#4766944)
With all of these places being "old world" is it simply that young civilian men would be more likely to be out milling about during open hostilities than young civilian women? That reason, plus, men are kind of stupider.

I'm going out on a limb to say it's a bit more likely these young "civilian" men were firing rockets than crashing the buffet line at a gay wedding.
   1602. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:10 AM (#4766946)
Breaking: Demonstrators gather in NY to protest ISIS genocide of Yazidi in Iraq

Q.F.#######.T.


Exactly.

Jews kill Muslim civilians while battling an evil regime: "War Crimes! Nazis!"

Muslims kill Yazidi and Christian civilians, intentionally, while engaged in genocide and ethnic cleansing: "crickets".
   1603. bunyon Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:13 AM (#4766947)
Basically, it boils down to this: the first, and only rule of war, is to win the war. You can deal with the moral fallout after. I don't like this about humans but until you can get everyone to sign on, them's the rules.

You can be angry at the US or Israel (or whoever) because they're "supposed to be better" but, in reality, in a streetfight, we're all pretty much the same. The world would be a better place if no one had any illusions that we're "better" at war than the other guys (better, being less civilian death). It may well have prevented our most recent wars where we thought we could kill a bunch of bad guys without killing innocents or, even, good guys.
   1604. Lassus Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:16 AM (#4766949)
I'm going out on a limb to say it's a bit more likely these young "civilian" men were firing rockets than crashing the buffet line at a gay wedding.

No one is arguing that there are no young Gazan men firing rockets. Conversely, your argument seems to be that there is no such thing as a young Gazan civilian man, which seems a bit of an oversell? (Granted, I don't know a thing about the percentages of the population who are fighting and not fighting.)
   1605. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:17 AM (#4766950)
Basically, it boils down to this: the first, and only rule of war, is to win the war. You can deal with the moral fallout after. I don't like this about humans but until you can get everyone to sign on, them's the rules.

There must be some limitations; there have always in history been limitations. You can't just commit genocide in order to win.

Even the Romans wouldn't massacre civilians unless they revolted.
   1606. Lassus Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:22 AM (#4766951)
Jews kill Muslim civilians while battling an evil regime: "War Crimes! Nazis!"
Muslims kill Yazidi and Christian civilians, intentionally, while engaged in genocide and ethnic cleansing: "crickets".


1. People are far more expressing (sometimes serious) concern than screaming war crimes, despite whatever fringe screaming occurs. Jesus, does only hyperbole exist in these discussions?

2. Why is it impossible to grasp that Israel and Palestine gets more national attention and press in this country than Iraq and the Kurds? It boggles the mind. What is the Israeli population and connection in this country vs. Iraqi population and connection? It's that hard to figure out?
   1607. zonk Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:23 AM (#4766952)
I really, really, really hate voting on judges.

As much as I can understand the desire for some level of accountability, it always bothers me to toss the decision to the voters. I'm not saying that voters are stupid - just that it's virtually impossible to get a critical mass of good decision making on judges in such a venue. I think I'm a pretty well informed - though, sure, highly partisan - voter, but my judge retention voting involves printing out the local Bar recommendations and copy/pasting onto my ballot. I'll check out other quasi-rating providers, but I don't think I've ever made a vote on a judge that didn't jibe with the recs...

Voting for office is a partisan, ideological affair - and there's nothing wrong with that... That's how our Republic functions. I just don't view the courts - or think the courts - should work that way. Of course, I can complain about Thomas, Alito, Scalia, etc with the best of them while simultaneously lauding Ginsburg, Sotomayor, etc... but I'm entirely sure I'd like a system of "retention" for federal judges.

   1608. Greg K Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:23 AM (#4766953)
There must be some limitations; there have always in history been limitations. You can't just commit genocide in order to win.

Agreed. There have always been rules of war, dependent on time and place. They aren't always followed, and infringements aren't always punished. But like any other (usually) unformalized structure of laws you have to make an at least somewhat convincing show of following them or else you can get into some trouble.
   1609. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:24 AM (#4766954)
2. Why is it impossible to grasp that Israel and Palestine gets more national attention and press in this country than Iraq and the Kurds? It boggles the mind. What is the Israeli population and connection in this country vs. Iraqi population and connection? It's that hard to figure out?

But that connection would argue for LESS criticism of Israel, not more.

Why are people being hyper-critical of a democratic nation and traditional ally, with the connections to the US you speak of? Yet, they ignore a hideous entity like ISIS?
   1610. Bitter Mouse Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:25 AM (#4766955)
Jews kill Muslim civilians while battling an evil regime: "War Crimes! Nazis!"

Muslims kill Yazidi and Christian civilians, intentionally, while engaged in genocide and ethnic cleansing: "crickets".


Extreme confirmation bias on display, aisle 9.

The conflict between Israel and Palestine has been going on for a long time. It is very important to the US for a whole host of reasons and has a high profile. The Yazidi crisis is what, less than a week old and has generated numerous reports in the media of all types and has garnered presidential attention AND action.

For you to compare them as you did is completely farcical.

Basically, it boils down to this: the first, and only rule of war, is to win the war. You can deal with the moral fallout after. I don't like this about humans but until you can get everyone to sign on, them's the rules.


And what Israel is doing is going to win many many battles and NEVER win the war. This is my major problem with their actions. SBB and snapper can babble about just war and morality, but Israel is being stupid and I expect better from them.

They will win these battles for as long as they care to fight them, they totally and completely militarily outmatch Hamas. And Hamas will continue to gather enough support though that they can continue on their present course essentially forever. Seriously, does anyone here think this is the straw that broke Hamas and THIS time they will give up and make peace?

So congratulations to Israel on its "victory" in this battle. And its victory in the next battle and the one after that and ...

At what point does winning the war take priority over winning the battle that Hamas wants them to fight? Let's just fast forward until then, because between now and then we all know what is going to happen. At least Israel's staunch defenders here and elsewhere will cheer their individual battle victories as good and just every stupid step of the way.
   1611. Bitter Mouse Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:29 AM (#4766957)
But that connection would argue for LESS criticism of Israel, not more.

Why are people being hyper-critical of a democratic nation and traditional ally, with the connections to the US you speak of? Yet, they ignore a hideous entity like ISIS?


snapper, seriously you are smarter than this. Honestly.

We hold our friends and allies to a higher standard than we hold iron age barbarians with automatic weapons. That does not mean we prefer the barbarians and it is moronic of you to make that suggestion. And seriously in what mirror universe is ISIS being ignored? Honestly you act as if the President of the US (and the leaders many other nations) had not expressed concern and begun to take action. Things move slowly in international affairs. Internet keyboard jockeys can type a the "solution" way faster than responses happen in the real world.
   1612. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:30 AM (#4766958)
2. Why is it impossible to grasp that Israel and Palestine gets more national attention and press in this country than Iraq and the Kurds? It boggles the mind. What is the Israeli population and connection in this country vs. Iraqi population and connection? It's that hard to figure out?

It looks for all the world that the difference is that Israel is successful and Westernized (not to mention Jewish) and therefore the left holds it in disproportionate contempt.(*) I see nothing else to explain the massive difference in treatment and perspective. Some will claim that the difference is because we give money to Israel, but that rings entirely hollow and flies in the face of the same treatment of Israel by the European left.

(*) In keeping with its traditions.
   1613. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:30 AM (#4766960)
The conflict between Israel and Palestine has been going on for a long time. It is very important to the US for a whole host of reasons and has a high profile.

It's not actually important at all. We make it important, because people love to scrutinize and criticize Israel.

Arab Gov'ts may use the Palestinians to stir up their people, and distract rage from their own incompetence, but nothing Israel does has impacted our relations with Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, etc., for four decades.
   1614. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:32 AM (#4766961)
It is very important to the US for a whole host of reasons and has a high profile.

Wherein the question is entirely begged.
   1615. JE (Jason) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:33 AM (#4766962)
And what Israel is doing is going to win many many battles and NEVER win the war. This is my major problem with their actions.

Israel's not going to win the war because it has to fight with both hands behind its back, a result of you and others seeming to have a major problem with any military response to rockets being fired at its cities.
   1616. Lassus Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:33 AM (#4766963)
Why are people being hyper-critical of a democratic nation and traditional ally, with the connections to the US you speak of?

a.) I already stated I think there is a - subconscious as well as conscious - bias against Jews. b.) I'm not signing on to "hyper-critical" And the connection bring greater knowledge. Connection doesn't mean default support, it means more people are simply aware and have reason to be aware.


Yet, they ignore a hideous entity like ISIS?

Already answered. Actively ignoring is not the same as having no knowledge or connection.
   1617. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:35 AM (#4766964)
snapper, seriously you are smarter than this. Honestly.

We hold our friends and allies to a higher standard than we hold iron age barbarians with automatic weapons. That does not mean we prefer the barbarians and it is moronic of you to make that suggestion. And seriously in what mirror universe is ISIS being ignored? Honestly you act as if the President of the US (and the leaders many other nations) had not expressed concern and begun to take action. Things move slowly in international affairs. Internet keyboard jockeys can type a the "solution" way faster than responses happen in the real world.


It has nothing to do with standards.

The Palestinian-Israeli conflict is complex, with no clear solution. We should give our allies the benefit of all reasonable doubt. That we don't is a sign of leftist anti-Westernism, lingering anti-colonialism wrongly applied, and, yes, anti-semitism.

The ISIS issue is clear cut. They are pure evil. The solution is clear; destroy them. The means is clear; arm and support the Kurds in driving ISIS out of northern Iraq, and killing every last one they can find. The fact that we've dithered 2 months, when the solution is crystal clear, while thousands die, and hundreds of thousands are driven from their homes, is a tragedy.
   1618. Lassus Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:35 AM (#4766965)
I see nothing else to explain the massive difference in treatment and perspective.

Forest and trees. SBB, how many Jews do you and your friends personally know vs. Iraqis in the city? "Nothing else" my ass.

And I'm arguing attention vs. support. As already stated, few people know WTF is going on with the Iraqis and Kurds because far far far fewer people are aware. I'm explaining why they are less aware.
   1619. JE (Jason) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:36 AM (#4766968)
Some will claim that the difference is because we give money to Israel, but that rings entirely hollow and flies in the face of the same treatment of Israel by the European left.

To be sure, Pakistan is a major recipient of US assistance and it's been bombing the #### out of North Waziristan. Remember all those protests? Yeah, neither do I.
   1620. Ron J2 Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:37 AM (#4766969)
#1464 Unfortunately it's both true that Hamas intermingles with civilians and false that Israel is not sometimes using more force than is necessary and false that (at best) they are not ####### up with targeting.

The specific this time around are in no way necessary to Israel defending itself.
   1621. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:38 AM (#4766970)
The ISIS issue is clear cut. They are pure evil. The solution is clear; destroy them. The means is clear; arm and support the Kurds in driving ISIS out of northern Iraq, and killing every last one they can find. The fact that we've dithered 2 months, when the solution is crystal clear, while thousands die, and hundreds of thousands are driven from their homes, is a tragedy.

We dithered when they were out in the open. I said it two months ago -- they should have been annihilated. It was the perfect opportunity to wipe out the most extreme of extremist Islamist terrorists and would have been like target practice. Obama should have been salivating at the opportunity he had.
   1622. Bitter Mouse Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:39 AM (#4766971)
It's not actually important at all. We make it important, because people love to scrutinize and criticize Israel.


Israel is our ally. We send them a shitton of aid. They have a huge lobby effort in Washington and have a ton of influence. There is a huge number of people in the US who have very strong feelings about Israel, the vast majority of them positive. US Presidents have been trying to negotiate peace in the region forever. Of course it is important to the US and its citizens.

On the other hand we have ... "people like to criticize Israel because reasons". Care to lay out those reasons we are criticizing Israel, since you obviously refuse to listen to or believe the reasons we are giving? Tell us oh telepathic one, why the criticism?

Wherein the question is entirely begged.


Clearly someone doesn't know the meaning of a term he has heard others use.

Begging the question means "assuming the conclusion (of an argument)", a type of circular reasoning. This is an informal fallacy where the conclusion that one is attempting to prove is included in the initial premises of an argument, often in an indirect way that conceals this fact


I am not assuming the are high profile, because they are high profile. See above for reasons that conflict is and has been high profile.
   1623. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:40 AM (#4766972)
a.) I already stated I think there is a - subconscious as well as conscious - bias against Jews. b.) I'm not signing on to "hyper-critical" And the connection bring greater knowledge. Connection doesn't mean default support, it means more people are simply aware and have reason to be aware.

OK, I'm glad you at least admit that.

Already answered. Actively ignoring is not the same as having no knowledge or connection.

Our Gov't has had knowledge for months. The Iraqi Gov't has been begging for airstrikes for months. We spent a trillion dollars and thousands of lives trying to secure Iraq from fanatics like these guys; how is that not a connection?

If people can watch 2000 year old Christian and Yazidi communities being wiped out by the Islamists and feel no connection, why do they feel connection to Palestinians suffering far, far less?
   1624. Random Transaction Generator Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:40 AM (#4766973)
Muslims kill Yazidi and Christian civilians, intentionally, while engaged in genocide and ethnic cleansing: "crickets".


These are some loud ####### "crickets".

I fully expect the Republicans to flip their positions by the end of the day and complain how Obama is dragging the US into a meaningless foreign conflict.
   1625. Lassus Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:40 AM (#4766974)
Obama should have been salivating at the opportunity he had.

Salivating on the internet about slaughter (justified or not) is not quite the same as being personally involved.
   1626. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:41 AM (#4766975)
Forest and trees. SBB, how many Jews do you and your friends personally know vs. Iraqis in the city? "Nothing else" my ass

A lot.

But I don't understand. Why would the fact that all/most of us have a bunch of Jewish friends mean Israel's actions would be more scrutinized? If anything, friendship means you give your friends more leeway to do what they think is right and defend themselves.
   1627. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:42 AM (#4766976)
Salivating on the internet about slaughter (justified or not) is not quite the same as being personally involved.

There should be no moral qualms whatever about slaughtering ISIS fighters. None.
   1628. Lassus Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:44 AM (#4766978)
If people can watch 2000 year old Christian communities being wiped out by the Islamists and feel no connection, why do they feel connection to Palestinians suffering far, far less?

I don't know about the government, I'm not the government. But the answer continues to be the same. The American public does not have the knowledge or interest in this conflict that they do for the Israeli/Palestine conflict. It is the same answer every time you ask it. There have been people dying everywhere for the past two decades in numbers worse than your Christians in Iraq. You didn't care or know about those for the same reason.
   1629. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:44 AM (#4766979)
On the other hand we have ... "people like to criticize Israel because reasons". Care to lay out those reasons we are criticizing Israel, since you obviously refuse to listen to or believe the reasons we are giving? Tell us oh telepathic one, why the criticism?

I did so in [1617].

1) Leftist anti-Westernism, and residual anti-colonialism. The Left has been actively rooting for the decline of the West since the days of Empire. There has never been a whack-job insurgent group the left couldn't sympathize with if it was non-Western, non-White, or preferably both.

2) Leftist anti-semitism. Plain and simple, they dislike the Jews, and hate Israel's success and strength.
   1630. Ron J2 Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:45 AM (#4766980)
#1508 Not that easy to make my ignore list. Only Kevin, JoeK, SBB and Joey had managed it before you.
   1631. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:45 AM (#4766981)
I don't know about the government, I'm not the government. But the answer continues to be the same. The American public does not have the knowledge or interest in this conflict that they do for the Israeli/Palestine conflict. It is the same answer every time you ask it. There have been people dying everywhere for the past two decades in numbers worse than your Christians in Iraq. You didn't care or know about those for the same reason.

We've been involved in Iraq for 10+ years. It would be trivial for a competent President to get Americans interested.
   1632. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:46 AM (#4766982)
#1508 Not that easy to make my ignore list. Only Kevin, JoeK, SBB and Joey had managed it before you.

I guess you feel we were too harsh in killing all those Nazis back in the 1940's too?

If you want to ignore me because I said a bunch of genocidal fanatics should be hunted down and killed, I'll take that as a badge of honor.
   1633. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:47 AM (#4766983)
1) Leftist anti-Westernism, and residual anti-colonialism. The Left has been actively rooting for the decline of the West since the days of Empire. There has never been a whack-job insurgent group the left couldn't sympathize with if it was non-Western, non-White, or preferably both.

2) Leftist anti-semitism. Plain and simple, they dislike the Jews, and hate Israel's success and strength.


Bingo, and the reasons indeed were already delineated. Leftists hate the West and hate the West's success and strength.
   1634. Bitter Mouse Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:54 AM (#4766985)
Israel's not going to win the war because it has to fight with both hands behind its back, a result of you and others seeming to have a major problem with any military response to rockets being fired at its cities.


So it is my fault Israel hasn't unleash nuclear devastation on the Palestinians? Hasn't engaged in genocide? Hasn't burned everything down and salted the earth?

I think you are giving me (and others like me) too much credit and Israel too little.
   1635. JE (Jason) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:57 AM (#4766986)
I guess you feel we were too harsh in killing all those Nazis back in the 1940's too?

"There is no military solution to this conflict." Said no one in Teheran, Yalta, and Potsdam.
   1636. JE (Jason) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 10:02 AM (#4766989)
So it is my fault Israel hasn't unleash nuclear devastation on the Palestinians? Hasn't engaged in genocide? Hasn't burned everything down and salted the earth?

So our United States engaged in acts of genocide during the Second World War, Korea, Vietnam, Kuwait, Iraq, and Afghanistan? LOL, Mouse. LOL.

In the world we live in (i.e., where moral relativism has run amok), Israel has chosen the least worst option in how to deal with Hamas' rocket and tunnel attacks.
   1637. Bitter Mouse Posted: August 08, 2014 at 10:04 AM (#4766991)
1) Leftist anti-Westernism, and residual anti-colonialism. The Left has been actively rooting for the decline of the West since the days of Empire. There has never been a whack-job insurgent group the left couldn't sympathize with if it was non-Western, non-White, or preferably both.

2) Leftist anti-semitism. Plain and simple, they dislike the Jews, and hate Israel's success and strength.


What a pile of crap. The left is in favor of "Westernism". We just a long subthread about how no matter who won elections the west kept moving left. The left loves the "western" nations. We love all the "decline in morality" and such spawned in the Western nations. We don't like religious extremists. In fact I keep getting told we hate all religion. Except I guess we love random barbarian religious nuts hwo hate us and would kill all our pet projects (like teh gay).

Honestly it is hard to keep up with all the terrible things that are tagged on the left,mostly because it changes with every argument. We hate Jews (but support them domestically and in return get overwhelming political support from them). We hate religion and war on Christmas EVERY YEAR. But we also always side with religious nut jobs abroad (but persecute them at home). And it goes on and on.

And of course their is anti-semitism on the left. And on the right. And in the center. Just like there is racism in all those places. However their is plenty of criticism for Israel from people who are fine with the Jews and with Israel (which are in fact NOT the same thing). I love how the same people who whine the loudest about being called racists by those mean lefties are the very first to use the anti-Semitic card. Give me a break.
   1638. Bitter Mouse Posted: August 08, 2014 at 10:06 AM (#4766992)
So our United States engaged in acts of genocide during the Second World War, Korea, Vietnam, Kuwait, Iraq, and Afghanistan? LOL, Mouse. LOL.


That is not what I said. How about you argue your point and stop the constant manufacture of straw men for mine?

You said explicitly that the only reason Israel could not win was our fault for making them not go all out. SO how are they going to win? Lay out how they will win? I have (many times) given my recipe. What is yours? What should they be doing?
   1639. Bitter Mouse Posted: August 08, 2014 at 10:08 AM (#4766994)
In the world we live in (i.e., where moral relativism has run amok), Israel has chosen the least worst option in how to deal with Hamas' rocket and tunnel attacks.


They have chosen a strategy that their number one enemy favors, which helps their enemy and insures the conflict can not end. Right now it is a battle of wills and neither side is going to blink. And so stalemate. Great victory you have lined up there sparky.
   1640. Lassus Posted: August 08, 2014 at 10:08 AM (#4766995)
But I don't understand. Why would the fact that all/most of us have a bunch of Jewish friends mean Israel's actions would be more scrutinized? If anything, friendship means you give your friends more leeway to do what they think is right and defend themselves.

I'm not talking about the opinions of what is occurring. I am answering the question of "WHY NO ATTENTION?" You're talking quality and I'm talking quantity.
   1641. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: August 08, 2014 at 10:19 AM (#4767000)

What a pile of crap.


seconded

This is just Snapper and SBB engaging in mindless poo flinging
   1642. The Good Face Posted: August 08, 2014 at 10:19 AM (#4767001)
What a pile of crap. The left is in favor of "Westernism". We just a long subthread about how no matter who won elections the west kept moving left. The left loves the "western" nations. We love all the "decline in morality" and such spawned in the Western nations. We don't like religious extremists. In fact I keep getting told we hate all religion. Except I guess we love random barbarian religious nuts hwo hate us and would kill all our pet projects (like teh gay).


The left has a long track record of supporting (or ignoring) barbarian religious nuts overseas for several reasons. It's a cheap way to burnish their multicultural credentials (holier-than-thou!) and more importantly, they want to use the barbarians as a weapon against what they see as their REAL enemies; western conservatives, Christians, white males who happen to be conservative and/or Christian, etc.

But we also always side with religious nut jobs abroad (but persecute them at home).


Pretty much, yes. Although to be fair, you guys also try to bring the religious nutjobs here to serve as foederati in your war against middle and working class whites. It's not like YOU and your ilk live near their neighborhoods.

I love how the same people who whine the loudest about being called racists by those mean lefties are the very first to use the anti-Semitic card. Give me a break.


I love how the same people who whine the loudest for being called anti-semites by those mean righties are the very first to use the racist card. You're reaping what you've sown.
   1643. Lassus Posted: August 08, 2014 at 10:25 AM (#4767005)
It's not like YOU and your ilk live near their neighborhoods.

Inasmuch as this argument continues to be stupid, it's now turned into wrong, as it was already pointed out that it's false as far as this particular ilk goes.

   1644. JE (Jason) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 10:26 AM (#4767006)
They have chosen a strategy that their number one enemy favors, which helps their enemy and insures the conflict can not end. Right now it is a battle of wills and neither side is going to blink. And so stalemate. Great victory you have lined up there sparky.

Hamas has lost some 70 percent of its rockets with no present way to get resupplied. Just about every tunnel leading into Israel was destroyed. Egypt is 100 percent opposed to them, as is pretty much every other Arab state not named Qatar. Gazan anger, currently directed at Israel, will eventually get redirected at Hamas for bringing them nothing but complete misery.

Oh, and Israel's "number one enemy" reportedly executed its own spokesman.

Israel won't score an unconditional victory à la World War II -- again, the hands are tied -- but it has done pretty damn well so far.
   1645. bunyon Posted: August 08, 2014 at 10:28 AM (#4767007)
Basically, it boils down to this: the first, and only rule of war, is to win the war. You can deal with the moral fallout after. I don't like this about humans but until you can get everyone to sign on, them's the rules.

There must be some limitations; there have always in history been limitations. You can't just commit genocide in order to win.


Limits are always talked about but the practical limit has always been: kill as few civilians as necessary to win the war. If the choice is, kill fewer civilians and lose, or fight longer OR kill more civilians and win, every (winning) combatant ever has chosen the latter. Back when wars were fought man to man, it was easy to avoid killing civilians. Harder to do today.

I think it true that Israel should look for a larger victory but I'm honestly not sure what that is. They have signed onto peace in the past and they are generally attacked soon after. What would that victory look like to the critics of Israel? What should convince them to silence their guns?

The ISIS issue is clear cut. They are pure evil. The solution is clear; destroy them. The means is clear; arm and support the Kurds in driving ISIS out of northern Iraq, and killing every last one they can find. The fact that we've dithered 2 months, when the solution is crystal clear, while thousands die, and hundreds of thousands are driven from their homes, is a tragedy.

We dithered when they were out in the open. I said it two months ago -- they should have been annihilated. It was the perfect opportunity to wipe out the most extreme of extremist Islamist terrorists and would have been like target practice. Obama should have been salivating at the opportunity he had.


Of course the goal in Iraq has always been to have an independent Iraq that can take care of itself so we don't have to. It isn't a pullout if every time a little band of armed men gather we have to launch the air force. If it was so easy to pick off ISIS several months ago (I agree, it probably was) then IRAQ SHOULD HAVE DONE IT. The fact that Iraq can't is a failure of Iraq, not the US. Otherwise, we should simply conquer the bastards, put Ted Cruz in as military governor and call it good. Again, we could kill any number of armed bandits around the world. Should we? Are we responsible?

If you think we're still responsible for armed bandits in Iraq, how long do you wish to stay and what is your exit plan? You know, the questions you should have had an answer to in 2003.

   1646. JE (Jason) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 10:29 AM (#4767008)
That is not what I said. How about you argue your point and stop the constant manufacture of straw men for mine?

You said explicitly that the only reason Israel could not win was our fault for making them not go all out. SO how are they going to win? Lay out how they will win? I have (many times) given my recipe. What is yours? What should they be doing?

Talk about straw. Do you even remember what you wrote that prompted my response?

See above.
   1647. Lassus Posted: August 08, 2014 at 10:34 AM (#4767011)
Hamas has lost some 70 percent of its rockets with no present way to get resupplied.

Didn't I read something about North Korea wanting to supply them? Or was that Qatar, as mentioned?


Gazan anger, currently directed at Israel, will eventually get redirected at Hamas for bringing them nothing but complete misery.

This would be great, but human beings are kind of ridiculous, so I'm not holding my breath. Pessimistic, I suppose.
   1648. JE (Jason) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 10:34 AM (#4767012)
If it was so easy to pick off ISIS several months ago (I agree, it probably was) then IRAQ SHOULD HAVE DONE IT. The fact that Iraq can't is a failure of Iraq, not the US.

Even if we didn't trust Maliki, there's no excuse for not supplying the Kurds with additional arms and training. Unfortunately, Obama, as with Syria and Ukraine, won't give weapons -- even small arms -- to allies in times of peril, no matter what threats they face.
   1649. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 10:36 AM (#4767013)
Israel won't score an unconditional victory à la World War II -- again, the hands are tied -- but it has done pretty damn well so far.
Yeah, the notion that Hamas wanted this outcome is just nutty.
   1650. The Good Face Posted: August 08, 2014 at 10:36 AM (#4767014)
Inasmuch as this argument continues to be stupid, it's now turned into wrong, as it was already pointed out that it's false as far as this particular ilk goes.


You're not part of that ilk Lassus, but the solitary data point of one single, childless, bohemian guy in his early 30s living in an East African neighborhood isn't much of a counterargument in any event.
   1651. JE (Jason) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 10:37 AM (#4767015)
Didn't I read something about North Korea wanting to supply them? Or was that Qatar, as mentioned?

How would these supplies get delivered? Oh, that's right: When the moral relativists (this isn't directed at you, Lassus) demand that Israel and Egypt loosen (actually, lift is more accurate) the blockade.
   1652. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: August 08, 2014 at 10:38 AM (#4767016)
In the world we live in (i.e., where moral relativism has run amok), Israel has chosen the least worst option in how to deal with Hamas' rocket and tunnel attacks.


They have chosen a strategy that their number one enemy favors, which helps their enemy and insures the conflict can not end. Right now it is a battle of wills and neither side is going to blink. And so stalemate. Great victory you have lined up there sparky.

It's hard to argue that Hamas isn't reaping a rather perverse set of political rewards from Israel's response to the rocket attacks, but the serious question remains: What is Israel's alternative? What would you do in response to hundreds of rocket attacks directed against your population centers, rockets launched in great part from sites that have concentrations of civilians? What would be the cumulative effect on the Israeli population if their government were to not make any sort of military response?

I generally try to avoid these Mideast threads because they tend to devolve into idiotic charges of "anti-semitism" and alleged "leftist" hatred of the West, as if being against colonialism is some sort of proof of that. This comes from the same small group of Primates who could find "leftism" in a discussion of the designated hitter, and it's not worth wasting one's breath in responding to them.

But all that said, you've got a country (Israel) that's been under constant military attack for years, from an entity that refuses even to acknowledge Israel's right to exist. What is a country like that supposed to do? Just sit there and take it? What's the real alternative?
   1653. Lassus Posted: August 08, 2014 at 10:41 AM (#4767020)
You're not part of that ilk Lassus, but the solitary data point of one single, childless, bohemian guy in his early 30s living in an East African neighborhood isn't much of a counterargument in any event.

I was (at the time, as now) at least childless. .333 is only a great percentage in baseball.

Your equivocating here, however, is a great data point for your response to anything that proves you incorrect, however.
   1654. Lassus Posted: August 08, 2014 at 10:42 AM (#4767022)
How will these supplies get delivered?

I still may be wrong about NK, I can't check right now, but that was my thought when I remembered thinking I had read that.
   1655. The Good Face Posted: August 08, 2014 at 10:44 AM (#4767023)
I was (at the time, as now) at least childless. .333 is only a great percentage in baseball.


You weren't married and you made your living walking dogs and doing singing gigs. That's single and bohemian in any reasonable person's book.

Bottom line, you're not part of the liberal elite, or even part of their upper middle class SWPL brigade.
   1656. Lassus Posted: August 08, 2014 at 10:44 AM (#4767024)
Yeah, the notion that Hamas wanted this outcome is just nutty.

I agree it's nutty, but the idea that Hamas is unaware of the bullied, martyr status it is reaping also seems a bit nutty.


You weren't married and you made your living walking dogs and doing singing gigs.

Good memory! But, also wrong. I'll grant I wasn't married, but I was living with someone. Also, I was never a full pro singer, only semi-pro; good supplementary income. I was working full-time as a case manager for a pretty big health insurance company. I owned suits, dress pants, collared shirts, ties, a tuxedo, a car, and I lived in a house. Keep trying. EDIT: Also, mid-twenties, not early 30s.
   1657. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 10:57 AM (#4767030)
I'll grant I wasn't married, but I was living with someone.


A fellow liberal?
   1658. The Good Face Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:00 AM (#4767031)
I'll grant I wasn't married, but I was living with someone.


Also known as "single".

Also, I was never a full pro, only a semi-pro.


That's even MORE bohemian.

I owned suits, dress pants, collared shirts, ties, a tuxedo, a car, and I lived in a house.


Where else would you live? Bohemians aren't known for dwelling in caves or tents, and plenty of them take jobs for a while as necessary. You pretty clearly didn't turn it into a career or long term thing. For a guy who took pains to extend his urban hipster adolescence well into middle age, you're sure eager to downplay it.
   1659. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:02 AM (#4767032)
I generally try to avoid these Mideast threads because they tend to devolve into idiotic charges of "anti-semitism" and alleged "leftist" hatred of the West, as if being against colonialism is some sort of proof of that.

Nothing wrong with being anti-colonialist. The problem is identify the Israelis as colonialists. They're not. They've got nowhere to "go home" to. It's their country.
   1660. Lassus Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:03 AM (#4767033)
A fellow liberal?

Even worse! A feminist Argentine (child!) immigrant whose family had escaped in the middle of the night from the remnants of the Dirty War.


Where else would you live? Bohemians aren't known for dwelling in caves or tents, and plenty of them take jobs for a while as necessary. You pretty clearly didn't turn it into a career or long term thing. For a guy who took pains to extend his urban hipster adolescence well into middle age, you're sure eager to downplay it.

You're basically ridiculous at this point. A liberal who doesn't live among minorities is a hypocrite, one who does deserves some other equally stupid indictment. Just admit your whims and be done with it.
   1661. Greg K Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:04 AM (#4767035)
Bottom line, you're not part of the liberal elite, or even part of their upper middle class SWPL brigade.

To use Robert Connell's model perhaps he is a subordinate liberal, while not enjoying the privileges accrued to the liberal elite never the less contributes to the elevation of the hegemonic liberal elite within society.

No offence Lassus, I just figure I spent a few years reading gender theory, I may as well get my money's worth and apply it to everything I possibly can.
   1662. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:05 AM (#4767036)
What a pile of crap. The left is in favor of "Westernism".

No, you're in favor of your modern multi-culutural, moral relativist, project to redefine Western culture.

The Western view that embraces our traditional system, culture, and morals (which contains a hefty loading of Judeo-Christian values) as the best was to live, is utterly abhorrent to you.

To illustrate my point, will you admit that Israeli has a superior civilization to that possessed by its Arab enemies?
   1663. The Good Face Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:13 AM (#4767038)
Even worse! A feminist Argentine (child!) immigrant


Ewww. You couldn't wait til she was 18 at least?

You're basically ridiculous at this point. A liberal who doesn't live among minorities is a hypocrite, one who does deserves some other equally stupid indictment. Just admit your whims and be done with it.


No, I'm just pointing out that you're not really part of the same "ilk" as BM.

To use Robert Connell's model perhaps he is a subordinate liberal, while not enjoying the privileges accrued to the liberal elite never the less contributes to the elevation of the hegemonic liberal elite within society.


"Useful idiot" is shorter and more to the point.
   1664. Lassus Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:17 AM (#4767041)
Ewww. You couldn't wait til she was 18 at least?

Couldn't read the ID, it was in Spanish! She said she was legal!


No, I'm just pointing out that you're not really part of the same "ilk" as BM.

If you say so. I'm not providing you my tax forms.


"Useful idiot" is shorter and more to the point.

See who you're enabling, Greg? Bags on softball every year AND uses your words to call people idiots.
   1665. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:18 AM (#4767043)
The first US airstrikes hit ISIS mobile artillery targeting Erbil (the Kurdish capital).

We CAN NOT let ISIS take Erbil. Full stop.

We should be send masses of weaponry, supplies, advisors, and air support to the Peshmerga. We should also be building a major air base in Iraqi Kurdistan, to reduce our reliance on Turkey.
   1666. Greg K Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:20 AM (#4767045)
Bags on softball every year

Wait, what? That's crossing the line.
   1667. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:21 AM (#4767046)
I generally try to avoid these Mideast threads because they tend to devolve into idiotic charges of "anti-semitism" and alleged "leftist" hatred of the West, as if being against colonialism is some sort of proof of that.

Nothing wrong with being anti-colonialist. The problem is identify the Israeli's as colonialists. They're not. They've got nowhere to "go home" to. It's their country.


Of course it is, but from the POV of the people they displaced they can easily appear to share a lot of a colonialist's traits, and the fact that their population is constantly being supplemented by right wing religious settlers from abroad doesn't diminish that perception, however unfair it might be in any overall picture.

The truth that hardliners on both sides refuse to acknowledge is that Israel is a wholly unique country that was created due to a wholly unique set of circumstances. To reduce the ongoing Mideast conflict to some black and white morality play is, to put it charitably, not very productive.

Unless the Jews were going to be awarded a big chunk of Germany as reparations for what they'd suffered at the hands of the Nazis, they were going to have to go somewhere, and the Zionist narrative provided a location that resonated with history. Statelessness and barely tolerated (or worse) assimilation throughout the rest of the world was not a serious alternative. This is where we agree.

But seriously, how does all this prattling about "leftist anti-semitism", a factor that's almost wholly irrelevant among American liberals, add anything to the discussion? That's especially true here, given that anti-semitism among BTF's resident "leftists" is purely a figment of someone's ideologically driven imagination.

The point remains: There's an ongoing rocket attack directed against Israeli civilians. What are Israel's real choices in responding to those attacks? This doesn't have a damn thing to do with Noam Chomsky or Jean-Paul Sartre, it has to do with the here and now, and it's a very concrete question.
   1668. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:21 AM (#4767047)
See who you're enabling, Greg? Bags on softball every year AND uses your words to call people idiots.

Yes, insults are uncalled for, and missing softball is inexcusable.
   1669. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:22 AM (#4767048)
I'll grant I wasn't married, but I was living with someone.

Also known as "single".


Lol.

I can vouch for Lassus's single abilities, though, from personal experience. Top notch.
   1670. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:24 AM (#4767049)
But seriously, how does all this prattling about "leftist anti-semitism", a factor that's almost wholly irrelevant among American liberals, add anything to the discussion? That's especially true here, given that anti-semitism among BTF's resident "leftists" is purely a figment of someone's ideologically driven imagination.

The point remains: There's an ongoing rocket attack directed against Israeli civilians. What are Israel's real choices in responding to those attacks? This doesn't have a damn thing to do with Noam Chomsky or Jean-Paul Sartre, it has to do with the here and now, and it's a very concrete question.


The anti-Israeli narrative is driven by anti-semitism. Just look at the riots in Europe.

Whether the leftist here are anti-semites (I don't think they are) or not, they're buying into a narrative heavily driven by anti-semitism.

I don't see that Israeli has any better choices than what they're doing. I also inherently sympathize with the Israelis because they are part of our shared culture, which is, IMHO, inherently superior to the culture of their enemies.
   1671. Lassus Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:25 AM (#4767050)
I can vouch for Lassus's single abilities, though, from personal experience. Top notch.

Ahem. Between you, me, and Sam, how many of us hit a towering HR at the last softball game you were at?


Unless you mean that gift basket I gave you that one time.
   1672. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:32 AM (#4767052)
The anti-Israeli narrative is driven by anti-semitism. Whether the leftist here are anti-semites (I don't think they are) or not, they're buying into a narrative heavily driven by anti-semitism.

On the Hamas side, no question, and you can extend that to the Arab side in general, and to a certain percentage of the European Left. But that narrative is almost completely absent from American critics of Israel's current campaign, and I don't see them as "buying into" anything but their own take on an extremely complex and ongoing tragedy. Just as you or I are doing.

I don't see that Israeli has any better choices than what they're doing.

And at this point, neither do I, tragic as the consequences of its actions are. But it's simply the least worst alternative.
   1673. The District Attorney Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:34 AM (#4767059)
I feel like this whole thing is a charade, because I think Netanyahu wants to sabotage the two-state solution that he outwardly claims to support. He can't say that, but he wants to very gradually keep nudging and pushing until control of the disputed areas becomes a fait accompli.

The past story of this conflict (and it always has been a "story", but it's been more true than false) was that the Israelis were willing to work towards a way to co-exist and the Palestinians didn't want to share. But I think that, even though the Israelis continue to show more respect for human life generally, that is no longer where we're at.

And, I mean, maybe that's okay. Maybe it makes sense that the Israelis have had enough after 65 years of this ####. Still, diplomacy is not going to work if one party privately has the opposite goal of the one it's supposed to be negotiating towards.
   1674. CrosbyBird Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:37 AM (#4767060)
I expect Israel to do better but it's outrageous to believe that the IDF isn't doing everything in its power to limit the number of civilian casualties. Name another army anywhere in the world -- and yes, that includes our own -- which has taken more precautions in similar situations.

I think Israel represents the best behavior of any nation under such difficult conditions, and yet it still is imperfect.

I suspect that an America-Palestine conflict would be over very quickly, with the Palestinians sitting in a smoking crater, if you could even find any left alive. After all, we don't hesitate to send in a militarized police force merely on suspicious of wrongdoing; an actual attack would be met with brutal and near-immediate force.
   1675. 'zop sympathizes with the wrong ####### people Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:38 AM (#4767061)
On the Hamas side, no question, and you can extend that to the Arab side in general, and to a certain percentage of the European Left. But that narrative is almost completely absent from American critics of Israel's current campaign, and I don't see them as "buying into" anything but their own take on an extremely complex and ongoing tragedy. Just as you or I are doing.


I disagree. I personally find you to be offensively anti-semitic. Sam sometime slips into anti-semitic rhetoric but that's just because he's a firehose of left-wing invective, some which is almost definitionally antisemitic.
   1676. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:41 AM (#4767064)
On the Hamas side, no question, and you can extend that to the Arab side in general, and to a certain percentage of the European Left. But that narrative is almost completely absent from American critics of Israel's current campaign, and I don't see them as "buying into" anything but their own take on an extremely complex and ongoing tragedy. Just as you or I are doing.

I disagre. I personally find you to be offensively anti-semitic.


Given that I've expressed my support for the Israeli position in its struggle against Hamas, that comment only reinforces your self-portrait of derangement.
   1677. GregD Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:41 AM (#4767065)
Not to distract from all Israel all the time, but on our previous discussion of corruption in charters Monkey Cage summarizes some updates about the theft and legal theft going on in michigan and Florida. Schools with no toilet paper while their boards make sweetheart real estate deals with their relatives, and no support for reform or oversight by the charter backers. Too bad. If charters fail as a policy it will be the misguided silence of the honest ones that allowed the thieves to destroy a movement.
   1678. Lassus Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:41 AM (#4767066)
The anti-Israeli narrative is driven by anti-semitism.

Can one disagree with something Israel does without being anti-semitic? Even when I've already stated there is an anti-Israel narrative?

I've been trying to state that I'm clearly far more on Israel's side than many here, and my latitude for what other people find objectionable is also far greater. However, there are things I also clearly do not agree with. Is moderation still driven by anti-semitism?
   1679. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:41 AM (#4767068)
Some will claim that the difference is because we give money to Israel, but that rings entirely hollow and flies in the face of the same treatment of Israel by the European left.


No discussion on this board involves the European left. The most Euro guy we have is Greg and his medieval history studies out of UK. The reports of truly antisemitic mobs out of France are appalling on their face. It would help your case here and in general if you were to stop pretending that we are they, or vice versa.
   1680. Lassus Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:45 AM (#4767070)
I disagre. I personally find you to be offensively anti-semitic.

Given that I've expressed my support for the Israeli position in its struggle against Hamas, that comment only reinforces your self-portrait of derangement.



I have to admit I find this a little confusing myself.
   1681. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:45 AM (#4767071)
We've been involved in Iraq for 10+ years. It would be trivial for a competent President to get Americans interested.


You've got the arrow of causation wrong here, buddy. The reason it's really hard to get Americans to sign up for intervention in Iraq is because we've been bogged down in that meaningless quagmire for 10+ years now.
   1682. Bitter Mouse Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:45 AM (#4767072)
It's hard to argue that Hamas isn't reaping a rather perverse set of political rewards from Israel's response to the rocket attacks, but the serious question remains: What is Israel's alternative? What would you do in response to hundreds of rocket attacks directed against your population centers, rockets launched in great part from sites that have concentrations of civilians? What would be the cumulative effect on the Israeli population if their government were to not make any sort of military response?


Well as I have said many times they (and by that I mean someone in the region) has to break the current dynamic. Currently it is a never ending retaliation for the retaliation which was a retaliation for the wrong that those guys did to my guys. And at each stage innocents on both sides are harmed, which causes them to buy into the need for revenge.

If you don't that this is the current dynamic then there is no point in me going farther, because that dynamic is what my solution addresses. That is the dynamic I want to look at and try to solve, not by winning individual revenge battles but by ending the war. My way is not cheap or easy. So if you think the current dynamic is OK, then also there is no point in my going forward, because my premise rests on the current dynamic being what it is and that it is unacceptable long term. If you disagree with either of those then it is a waste of ones and zeros to continue the discussion (and there is a shortage of ones, so I am sensitive to that).
   1683. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:46 AM (#4767073)
Can one disagree with something Israel does without being anti-semitic? Even when I've already stated there is an anti-Israel narrative?

Sure. I just think one needs to be careful not to use the arguments and language of the anti-semites.

Just like one can honestly criticize welfare dependency, but you should be careful to avoid the argument and language of the race-baiters.
   1684. CrosbyBird Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:47 AM (#4767076)
You guys must consider pretty much all of WW2 to be a huge war crime by the US and UK; we really effed up that continent, and killed millions (including lots of friendlies) with our "strategic" bombing.

Do you have any doubt that if we lost WWII that we would not be accused of war crimes for the bombing of Berlin and Tokyo?

I would distinguish Hamas from Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan in a number of ways, but most importantly, the fact that they were credible threats that, left unchecked, would not have stopped until they conquered the world. Their ideologies were not only poisonous, but their reach was extreme.

I think you can justify a lot more force against a world power that is annexing territory and rounding up civilians for death and torture than you can against a ragtag group of stateless people with an ineffective military and tepid support from the citizens. Frankly, I think Putin is much more terrifying than Hamas.
   1685. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:47 AM (#4767077)
I disagree. I personally find you to be offensively anti-semitic. Sam sometime slips into anti-semitic rhetoric but that's just because he's a firehose of left-wing invective, some which is almost definitionally antisemitic.


You have to understand 'zop's definition of 'antisemitism' here. Basically, anything but abject deference to anything the most right wing elements of the Israeli government wants to do is "antisemitism" in his world.
   1686. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:48 AM (#4767079)
Sure. I just think one needs to be careful not to use the arguments and language of the anti-semites.


I've yet to see anyone here use the "language of anti-semites."
   1687. tshipman Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:51 AM (#4767081)
I think Israel represents the best behavior of any nation under such difficult conditions, and yet it still is imperfect.


I don't think this is true at all. Israel has continued expanding the settlements and they attempt to weaken any Palestinian unity movements to create weaker negotiating partners.

   1688. Bitter Mouse Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:51 AM (#4767082)
I have to admit I find this a little confusing myself.


I know, right? Andy is hardly anti-Semitic (well from his posts anyway, I guess he could have a Marge Schott collectible collection somewhere from his years as a shopkeeper, but somehow I doubt it).

The blind lashing out any any criticism of Israel has always struck me as a bit bizarre, but purely emotional responses typically are.

You've got the arrow of causation wrong here, buddy. The reason it's really hard to get Americans to sign up for intervention in Iraq is because we've been bogged down in that meaningless quagmire for 10+ years now.


Amen brother, preach it!

This is a natural consequence that hawks in their never ending quest for more military adventures get. You have to pick your spots or your true nature is revealed.
   1689. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:51 AM (#4767083)
I generally try to avoid these Mideast threads because they tend to devolve into idiotic charges of "anti-semitism" and alleged "leftist" hatred of the West, as if being against colonialism is some sort of proof of that.

Your's and BM's perspective on Algeria -- you'll recall BM reveling in the "ass-kicking" France purportedly received -- is proof positive of it. It's not that leftists say explicitly, "I hate America, I hate England," etc., it's just that they hate most of the things that define America, England, etc. -- and they definitely hate the white males who predominantly built America and England into America and England.

And they detest "colonialism," at base, because they don't think that places like England and France had any moral basis to attempt to export their civilizations. Why? Because at base they detest those civilizations, or at the very least, think them no better than, e.g., the Islamist mob that ethnically cleansed Algeria.
   1690. CrosbyBird Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:53 AM (#4767084)
Gaza is an enemy nation to Israel.

Gaza isn't a nation. It's a portion of occupied territory, and you can't in good faith disconnect it from the West Bank. There is no Palestinian state. There's just a bunch of people with a corrupt government propped up from the outside.

I've been pretty solidly supportive of Israel as the "good guy" in this conflict but they are not without blame and it is worth noting that even in WWII, the military:civilian casualties of war were over 4:1 in both Germany and Japan.
   1691. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:58 AM (#4767090)
I've yet to see anyone here use the "language of anti-semites."

There have been plenty of implications that the Israelis are deliberately causing civilian casualties. Your comment about the ratio of civilian dead was unfortunate.

I know, right? Andy is hardly anti-Semitic

I don't think any of the posters here are anti-semitic, but sometimes unfortunate rhetoric is used.
   1692. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: August 08, 2014 at 11:58 AM (#4767091)
No discussion on this board involves the European left.

Huh? Unless one uses the adjective "American" in front of left, every discussion of the left includes the European left. In the case of Israel, you can't talk about the left accurately without including the European left.
   1693. Greg K Posted: August 08, 2014 at 12:00 PM (#4767094)
Huh? Unless one uses the adjective "American" in front of left, every discussion of the left includes the European left. In the case of Israel, you can't talk about the left accurately without including the European left.

I think he means none of the posters here are members of the European left.
   1694. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 12:00 PM (#4767095)
I've been pretty solidly supportive of Israel as the "good guy" in this conflict but they are not without blame and it is worth noting that even in WWII, the military:civilian casualties of war were over 4:1 in both Germany and Japan.

Not in urban combat it wasn't.

If Hamas had simply evacuated civilians from the northern areas, civilian Gazan casualties would be much, much lower. But, they want to use their own civilians as shields.
   1695. Bitter Mouse Posted: August 08, 2014 at 12:02 PM (#4767096)
Your's and BM's perspective on Algeria -- you'll recall BM reveling in the "ass-kicking" France purportedly received -- is proof positive of it. It's not that leftists say explicitly, "I hate America, I hate England," etc., it's just that they hate most of the things that define America, England, etc. -- and they definitely hate the white males who predominantly built America and England into America and England.


LOL. I don't hate the French you moron. I make fun of the French, because of ... well mostly just because I decided at a young age to do that, and as a great nation with a fine history I suspect they can handle my good natured scorn just fine. And it was not reveling in the French ass-kicking, so much as calling it was it was. They were driven out of "their country" (as they saw it) by a bunch of low rent thugs. The French have fallen far in their martial prowess since Napoleon (who of course wasn't really French at all).

And as it turns out I LOVE the things that define "The West". The freedom, liberality, tolerance, cultural diversity, and economic success that defines the west is bread and butter to a progressive like myself. I don't like your crappy "West" that exists in your head and is ever in decline (since at least 1979 and is obsessed with race), but fortunately it doesn't really exist.
   1696. Bitter Mouse Posted: August 08, 2014 at 12:05 PM (#4767098)
If Hamas had simply evacuated civilians from the northern areas, civilian Gazan casualties would be much, much lower. But, they want to use their own civilians as shields.


This conflict and WWII are not even close to comparable. One is a stand up war the other is asymmetric warfare. Why are we (on either side of the discussion) trying to compare the two? It is silly. But to your point I fully expect there to be higher civilian casualties in asymmetric warfare.
   1697. 'zop sympathizes with the wrong ####### people Posted: August 08, 2014 at 12:06 PM (#4767100)
Given that I've expressed my support for the Israeli position in its struggle against Hamas, that comment only reinforces your self-portrait of derangement.


I fail to understand the connection between the two (and that's been the point on both sides). Support for Israel does not give you clean hands; you're an anti-semite because you harbor anti-semitic views toward Jews.
   1698. 'zop sympathizes with the wrong ####### people Posted: August 08, 2014 at 12:08 PM (#4767101)
This conflict and WWII are not even close to comparable. One is a stand up war the other is asymmetric warfare
.

I'm not sure the distinction is so clear if we're talking about the end of the war in europe; it got pretty asymmetric as Germany collapsed.
   1699. Lassus Posted: August 08, 2014 at 12:09 PM (#4767102)
...you're an anti-semite because you harbor anti-semitic views toward Jews.

Which are? Can you quote them before interpreting them? I honestly want to know what you're seeing.
   1700. tshipman Posted: August 08, 2014 at 12:11 PM (#4767105)
There have been plenty of implications that the Israelis are deliberately causing civilian casualties. Your comment about the ratio of civilian dead was unfortunate.


Saying that Israel is not doing enough to prevent civilian casualties = antisemitism.

Good to know.

What a ####### toxic discussion.
Page 17 of 64 pages ‹ First  < 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Jim Wisinski
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread, September 2014
(353 - 2:01am, Sep 22)
Last: Swedish Chef

NewsblogRoyals encounter problem with online sale of playoff tickets
(32 - 1:58am, Sep 22)
Last: AJMcCringleberry

NewsblogHBT: Talking head says Jeter is “a fraud” and “you are all suckers”
(102 - 1:25am, Sep 22)
Last: bobm

NewsblogCameron: The Stealth MVP Candidacy of Hunter Pence
(48 - 1:07am, Sep 22)
Last: shoewizard

NewsblogJohn Thorn: Fame & Fandom
(18 - 12:51am, Sep 22)
Last: Bunny Vincennes

NewsblogA’s lose Triple-A Sacramento affiliate
(92 - 12:40am, Sep 22)
Last: Toothless

NewsblogOT: NFL/NHL thread
(8037 - 12:34am, Sep 22)
Last: AuntBea

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - September 2014
(296 - 11:51pm, Sep 21)
Last: Der-K and the statistical werewolves.

NewsblogEn Banc Court May Call Foul on Bonds Conviction
(42 - 11:50pm, Sep 21)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogOT August 2014:  Wrassle Mania I
(204 - 11:37pm, Sep 21)
Last: SouthSideRyan

NewsblogJames Shields is the perfect pitcher at the perfect time
(47 - 11:03pm, Sep 21)
Last: Shibal

NewsblogOT: NBC.news: Valve isn’t making one gaming console, but multiple ‘Steam machines’
(834 - 10:57pm, Sep 21)
Last: CrosbyBird

NewsblogOT: Politics, September, 2014: ESPN honors Daily Worker sports editor Lester Rodney
(3429 - 10:56pm, Sep 21)
Last: Greg K

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 9-21-2014
(102 - 10:51pm, Sep 21)
Last: salvomania

NewsblogAthletics out of top wild-card spot, Texas sweeps
(18 - 10:30pm, Sep 21)
Last: Spahn Insane

Page rendered in 1.1177 seconds
53 querie(s) executed