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

Wednesday, January 02, 2013

OTP - Jan 2013: Jewish Journal:E1: An error in baseball and Mideast politics

Tripon Posted: January 02, 2013 at 02:48 PM | 2805 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: ot, politics

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 2 of 29 pages  < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >  Last ›
   101. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: January 03, 2013 at 12:19 PM (#4337911)
I intensely dislike a lot of what Israel does (and the ultra-orthodox are complete nutters), but I can't honestly say that if I faced the kind of existential threat they do, I would act any better than the Israelis.


Israel does not face any sort of existential threat. Egypt is in revolution. The Egyptian military has never been a match for Israel and currently is barely able to maintain it power against its own people. Ditto for Syria. Jordan presents no serious military threat. Iraq is a sectarian mess that currently couldn't invade an empty desert. Moreover Israel has nuclear weapons. Taiwan represents more of an existential threat to China than the Muslim world does to Israel. The Palestinian question is also the single greatest source of Muslim hatred of Israel. Discussions of Israeli security are a dodge, and in fact Israeli attempts to increase its own security have only resulted in decreasing it.
   102. BrianBrianson Posted: January 03, 2013 at 12:19 PM (#4337913)

Do you honestly expect the Palestinians to cede their claim to Jerusalem as a shared capitol?


Do you honestly believe there are no other disagreements in the conflict?

I honestly expect that the Palestinians won't have Jerusalem as their shared capital. Whether it's because they cede it or because they refuse to cede it and get steamrolled is really their choice. I'm not sure which they're likely to choose. You can take the position that the Palestinians should get the whol region and the Jews should be deported to Baffin Island, but you can't realistically expect Israel will seriously entertain your suggestion.
   103. The Chronicles of Reddick Posted: January 03, 2013 at 12:27 PM (#4337917)
   104. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: January 03, 2013 at 12:40 PM (#4337926)
That Kessler article is ridiculous.
   105. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: January 03, 2013 at 12:42 PM (#4337928)
There's a famous quote about Israel's army: That they can't afford to lose one war. I think Israelis need to understand that. While it does seem like the Arabs/Muslims may never unite, who knows what will happen in the world? In 1981, 85% of the Chinese were living in poverty.

The only way to avoid losing a war is try to find a lasting peace.
   106. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: January 03, 2013 at 12:44 PM (#4337932)
I've said in the past that there are three big issues at stake in the Palestinian conflict:

1) Territorial integrity of Palestine encompassing the entire West Bank (i.e. all or almost all settler enclaves evacuated)

2) East Jerusalem as Palestinian capital

3) Right of Palestinian refugees to return to Israel and compensated for lost property

Each side will have to give in on at least one of those issues to end the conflict. Given the power imbalance, it will probably be 2-1 in favor of Israel. But Israel seems uninclined to give in on any of those three points.
   107. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 03, 2013 at 12:47 PM (#4337933)
There's a famous quote about Israel's army: That they can't afford to lose one war. I think Israelis need to understand that. While it does seem like the Arabs/Muslims may never unite, who knows what will happen in the world? In 1981, 85% of the Chinese were living in poverty.

The only way to avoid losing a war is try to find a lasting peace.


But, you can't find lasting peace with a counterparty that wants you destroyed.

There's very little risk of the Israeli's losing a conventional war. Their issue is they can't win a counter-insurgency.

They need an Arab gov't to control the Palestinian territories that actually fears their conventional military. Jordan could control the insurgency, and Arab state/police force can control Palestine, and would have the incentive to do so, b/c they would fear Israeli armored columns occupying Amman, and deposing the Hashemites.
   108. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: January 03, 2013 at 12:48 PM (#4337934)
106 has it right. I don't think it makes sense to say that East Jerusalem is *the* sticking point, but Israel will have to compromise on one or two of those issues. Israel will never give in on 3), so the first two are the most likely areas for negotiation. I'd like to see Israel hand over most of the west bank and abandon the settlers, and give them East Jerusalem.
   109. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 03, 2013 at 12:51 PM (#4337935)
106 has it right. I don't think it makes sense to say that East Jerusalem is *the* sticking point, but Israel will have to compromise on one or two of those issues. Israel will never give in on 3), so the first two are the most likely areas for negotiation. I'd like to see Israel hand over most of the west bank and abandon the settlers, and give them East Jerusalem.

The solution to East Jerusalem needs to be some sort of "Free-city" controlled by neither the Israelis or the Palestinians.

If the West Bank was ruled by a reasonable Gov't, you could see joint-policing (Israeli/Arab/3rd party, e.g. UN) like the Allies did in Berlin and Vienna after WW2.
   110. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: January 03, 2013 at 12:53 PM (#4337940)
But, you can't find lasting peace with a counterparty that wants you destroyed.

I don't buy that most Palestinians want Israel destroyed. I think the vast majority of them want nothing more than a normal life, and would be perfectly happy to co-exist if they had the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and a functioning government and economy.
   111. BrianBrianson Posted: January 03, 2013 at 12:56 PM (#4337945)
Given the power imbalance, it will probably be 2-1 in favor of Israel. But Israel seems uninclined to give in on any of those three points.


I'm not sure if you're looking at too short a time frame or not, but Israel has shown willingness to give back land for peace (the Suez, and one can look at unilateral Gaza disengagement that way). I suspect the latter half of three, but not the former half of three, is also doable. But I don't think they'd do it unless they believed they'd get a lasting peace, and I have no idea how you could reasonably convince them (or any reasonable person in their position) that's going to happen.
   112. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 03, 2013 at 01:02 PM (#4337952)
I don't buy that most Palestinians want Israel destroyed. I think the vast majority of them want nothing more than a normal life, and would be perfectly happy to co-exist if they had the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and a functioning government and economy.

I agree with that. But a lot of the putative leadership, the Islamists and radicals, wants Israel destroyed (or at least finds that position politically useful). And they have powerful support from Islamists across the Sunni world, and also Iran.

The Palestinian issue, left unresolved, is a powerful club for lots of the nasty elements of Arab and Muslim society/leadership. The interests of the Arab man on the street doesn't seem to matter very much to their political leadership.
   113. BrianBrianson Posted: January 03, 2013 at 01:11 PM (#4337963)
I'll also endorse 106 as reasonable.

It's not clear that it's useful so long as it ignores the "Israel must be destroyed" demand. While many (probably the majority?) of Palestinians don't want that, and support for it would probably dry up almost completely if Palestine was a well functioning state such that everyone had houses, jobs, etc, it's not clear that it can be ignored before that. A chicken and egg-y kind of problem.
   114. zonk Posted: January 03, 2013 at 01:19 PM (#4337969)
Stepping back onshore for a moment...

The 113th Congress just kicked off... Boehner expected to be reelected in about half an hour (though, there are some rumors to the contrary continuing to swirl, but nothing from any good sources).

Nice to see that the majority caucus can maintain its sense of humor -- but I think the joke is misplaced, as Boehner, I'm sure, would dearly, dearly love to have a good chunk of his own conference attend this imaginary obedience school!
   115. Gold Star - just Gold Star Posted: January 03, 2013 at 01:27 PM (#4337973)
Boehner expected to be reelected in about half an hour (though, there are some rumors to the contrary continuing to swirl, but nothing from any good sources).
According to tweets, Breitbart.com's headline into early this AM was how Boehner would be bounced today. Uh huh.
   116. The John Wetland Memorial Death (CoB) Posted: January 03, 2013 at 01:40 PM (#4337981)

(CNN) – Hours after Congress sent a bill for the president's signature to avoid the fiscal cliff, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is already gearing up for the next showdown.

The Kentucky Republican wrote in an op-ed that President Barack Obama should be prepared to "have a fight" over government spending and the debt limit in the coming weeks, adding that the tax debate is now a thing of the past with the new legislation.

"I have news for him: The moment that he and virtually every elected Democrat in Washington signed off on the terms of the current arrangement, it was the last word on taxes. That debate is over," McConnell wrote in the Yahoo News op-ed. "Now the conversation turns to cutting spending on the government programs that are the real source of the nation's fiscal imbalance. And the upcoming debate on the debt limit is the perfect time to have that discussion."

...

Obama said in his statement late Tuesday night at the White House that he wants "less drama" and "brinksmanship" in future negotiations over fiscal matters.

"I will not have another debate with this Congress over whether or not they should pay the bills that they've already racked up through the laws that they passed," he said.

...

McConnell wrote that the president should get ready for the battle.

"The President may not want to have a fight about government spending over the next few months, but it's the fight he is going to have, because it's a debate the country needs," he said, adding that Obama "must show up" and deliver a serious plan for slashing federal spending.

"That's the debate the American people really want. It's a debate Republicans are ready to have. And it's the debate that starts today, whether the President wants it or not," McConnell wrote.


Yeah, this is going to end well ...
   117. CrosbyBird Posted: January 03, 2013 at 01:42 PM (#4337983)
Anything that doesn't give the Palestinians/Arabs control of the Al-Aqsa Mosque is a non-starter.

Not that I have any stake in the fight, but isn't that same territory even more sacred to the Jewish people as it is to the Muslims? The Al-Aqsa Mosque rests on the Temple Mount. My understanding is that the Al-Aqsa Mosque is the third-holiest site in Islamic tradition; it is the holiest site in Judaic tradition. Why is the Arab claim to that territory any more valid that that of the Jewish people?

This is why I think resolution is nearly impossible in this conflict. Each side will not move because of a relatively small piece of land that holds incredibly strong religious significance. If it were at all politically feasible, I would suggest that East Jerusalem become truly international territory, belonging to neither group and maintained by secular authorities. That seems like the only true compromise; a global recognition that this territory is sacred to both sides and therefore cannot be fairly "owned" by one to the exclusion of the other.
   118. DA Baracus is a "bloodthirsty fan of Atlanta." Posted: January 03, 2013 at 01:54 PM (#4337994)
The 113th Congress is off to a flying start. Allen West and Colin Powell have received votes for Speaker.
   119. CrosbyBird Posted: January 03, 2013 at 01:56 PM (#4337997)
There's a famous quote about Israel's army: That they can't afford to lose one war. I think Israelis need to understand that. While it does seem like the Arabs/Muslims may never unite, who knows what will happen in the world? In 1981, 85% of the Chinese were living in poverty.

The thing is, they probably won't. If it comes to actual war, I only see two legitimate possibilities: the Israelis win again, or the Israelis self-destruct by going nuclear when losing seems inevitable.

It's the same idea as to why there will almost certainly never be a direct war between the US and China. Both countries know that neither will ever stand for the ideological damage that comes from losing to the other. That means that the only end of such a conflict is one side nuking the other, which pretty much ends existence as we know it.

We need to hope as world citizens that we never end up with a nuclear power that is willing to accept that consequence.
   120. Ok, Griffey's Dunn (Nothing Iffey About Griffey) Posted: January 03, 2013 at 02:11 PM (#4338018)
The 113th Congress is off to a flying start. Allen West and Colin Powell have received votes for Speaker.


Don't you have to be a member of Congress to be Speaker...
   121. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: January 03, 2013 at 02:13 PM (#4338023)
I can't see Israel nuking its own people or making the Jewish holy land uninhabitable for generations.
   122. DA Baracus is a "bloodthirsty fan of Atlanta." Posted: January 03, 2013 at 02:14 PM (#4338024)
Don't you have to be a member of Congress to be Speaker...


That's what makes them noteworthy.
   123. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 03, 2013 at 02:18 PM (#4338033)
It's the same idea as to why there will almost certainly never be a direct war between the US and China. Both countries know that neither will ever stand for the ideological damage that comes from losing to the other. That means that the only end of such a conflict is one side nuking the other, which pretty much ends existence as we know it.

I think a limited naval/air war is possible without ending in nukes. Neither country can ever realistically hope to project military power against the other's homeland, so the existential threat required to induce the use of nukes probably isn't there. If a limited war was lost, the losing gov't would simply fall (either through coup, resignation or election) and the lose blamed on those people.
   124. zonk Posted: January 03, 2013 at 02:24 PM (#4338045)
Don't you have to be a member of Congress to be Speaker...



That's what makes them noteworthy.


Actually - you don't... it's never happened in practice, but there's no requirement that the House speaker be a sitting member -- it was one of the teaper dream scenarios.

Moot, though - Boehner reelected speaker on the 1st roll call... It was actually close - by my count, he escaped a second ballot by 2 votes.

Actually, I think the gig was probably up when the rumored plans to force a secret ballot for speaker never materialized.
   125. BDC Posted: January 03, 2013 at 02:25 PM (#4338047)
Am I misremembering, or wasn't there an actual direct shooting war between the US and Communist China in the 1950s? There was certainly danger of escalation then (and Soviet intervention). But ever since the 1980s, the great guarantor of peace has been the unprecedented mutual interconnection between the Chinese and US economies. Not that that's bound to last forever, or be absolute proof against war, but one just can't currently imagine the US and China having anything to fight over. Everybody's just making too much money.
   126. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: January 03, 2013 at 02:29 PM (#4338055)
Am I misremembering, or wasn't there an actual direct shooting war between the US and Communist China in the 1950s?

Technically not, but since we were part of the UN forces and China was allied with North Korea, it's kind of a lawyer's point to say that we weren't fighting them.
   127. DA Baracus is a "bloodthirsty fan of Atlanta." Posted: January 03, 2013 at 02:29 PM (#4338057)
Actually - you don't... it's never happened in practice, but there's no requirement that the House speaker be a sitting member -- it was one of the teaper dream scenarios.


I did not know that. Still, Allen West getting votes is inexcusable.
   128. Gold Star - just Gold Star Posted: January 03, 2013 at 02:50 PM (#4338073)
Still, Allen West getting votes is inexcusable.
Some men just want to watch the world burn.
   129. CrosbyBird Posted: January 03, 2013 at 02:54 PM (#4338079)
I can't see Israel nuking its own people or making the Jewish holy land uninhabitable for generations.

If it's a war that the Israelis have any chance of losing, there will be people outside of Israel to nuke, and I certainly see that as a possibility.

Am I misremembering, or wasn't there an actual direct shooting war between the US and Communist China in the 1950s?

Did China have nuclear weapons in the 1950s? I'm not snarking, but asking seriously.

one just can't currently imagine the US and China having anything to fight over. Everybody's just making too much money.

I can't imagine it either, under current financial conditions. But in the nuclear age, I can't imagine it even if the financial conditions change dramatically.
   130. BDC Posted: January 03, 2013 at 03:22 PM (#4338111)
Did China have nuclear weapons in the 1950s?

China did not build nuclear weapons till the 1960s. US use of them in the Korean War was seriously debated, and who knows how the Soviets would have reacted to that. Calmer minds prevailed.

   131. Mefisto Posted: January 03, 2013 at 03:23 PM (#4338113)
Did China have nuclear weapons in the 1950s? I'm not snarking, but asking seriously.


No, not until 1964.
   132. Rickey! In a van on 95 south... Posted: January 03, 2013 at 03:47 PM (#4338135)
Not that I have any stake in the fight, but isn't that same territory even more sacred to the Jewish people as it is to the Muslims? The Al-Aqsa Mosque rests on the Temple Mount. My understanding is that the Al-Aqsa Mosque is the third-holiest site in Islamic tradition; it is the holiest site in Judaic tradition. Why is the Arab claim to that territory any more valid that that of the Jewish people?


Well, yes, if that scrap of desert wasn't super-duper special to a multiple religious nutjobs then the situation would be simpler.
   133. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: January 03, 2013 at 04:00 PM (#4338151)
Part of the problem is the margin for error- In the past the Israelis believed they could never make single mistake, or game over for them...

Of course even if that was once true it is n longer true, moreover Israeli can make political/diplomatic mistakes almost freely- there is literally almost no downside because the Palestinians have shown repeatedly that they are incapable of capitalizing when Israel does screw up.

One reason that Israel has and has maintained the upperhand all these decades is that the Pales continually make tactical mistakes- for instance, the wave of attacks after Rabin's assassination in the run up to the next election was a staggeringly appallingly awful tactical and strategic mistake- right up there with the rejection of the original UN partition plan.
   134. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: January 03, 2013 at 04:11 PM (#4338161)
Didn't Macarthur want to use tactical nukes on the Chinese forces in Korea?
   135. The Chronicles of Reddick Posted: January 03, 2013 at 04:12 PM (#4338164)
Edit
104. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: January 03, 2013 at 12:40 PM (#4337926)
That Kessler article is ridiculous.


Explain please?
   136. Dan The Mediocre Posted: January 03, 2013 at 04:12 PM (#4338165)
Didn't Macarthur want to use tactical nukes on the Chinese forces in Korea?


And in China.
   137. spike Posted: January 03, 2013 at 04:14 PM (#4338166)
From wiki -

"MacArthur did not advocate the use of nuclear weapons to recover the situation.[81][82] In his testimony before the Senate Inquiry, he said that he had never recommended their use.[83] In 1960, MacArthur challenged a statement by Truman that he had wanted to use nuclear weapons, and Truman issued a retraction, stating that he had no documentary evidence of this claim; it was merely his personal opinion"

So, maybe, but not publicly in any event.
   138. Rickey! In a van on 95 south... Posted: January 03, 2013 at 04:16 PM (#4338169)
It occurs to me that the cartoon is a play at second base. I had assumed it was at 3B, but I think the cutout of the grass suggests that the umpire/assaultee is leading off of second.
   139. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 03, 2013 at 04:19 PM (#4338175)
It occurs to me that the cartoon is a play at second base. I had assumed it was at 3B, but I think the cutout of the grass suggests that the umpire/assaultee is leading off of second.

I still want to know why the ump is wearing a sweater.
   140. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: January 03, 2013 at 04:27 PM (#4338189)
Explain please?

It just makes no sense to fact check a point that's open to several interpretations. Kessler admits that Obama's comment is accurate when viewed in the context of the current tax rates remaining on the books, and since that was the GOP position he was negotiating against, it's a perfectly fair comparison. IOW, the compromise that passed will reduce the deficit by $700B as compared to the rates that most republicans wanted. Moreover, he criticizes Obama for framing the deal as a victory when it wasn't exactly what he or the Democrats wanted. Huh? That's not a statement that needs to be factchecked in any way, shape, or form, and it's absurd to suggest that Obama should have said "well, I didn't get 100% of what I wanted and therefore I failed."

Kessler even says at the end that he wasn't sure whether to give him any pinocchios, but just decided to anyway because his statement sounds "paradoxical" and he's being "too clever." I'd call that projection.
   141. spike Posted: January 03, 2013 at 04:30 PM (#4338193)
Kessler is a fallacy of the midpoint, "both sides are bad!" idiot.
   142. Commissioner Bud Black Beltre Hillman Posted: January 03, 2013 at 04:35 PM (#4338202)
I still want to know why the ump is wearing a sweater.

I still want to know why folks considered the cartoon to be "unduly inflammatory".
   143. Eddo Posted: January 03, 2013 at 04:46 PM (#4338220)
I still want to know why the ump is wearing a sweater.

It looks like a jacket with cuffs to me.
   144. DA Baracus is a "bloodthirsty fan of Atlanta." Posted: January 03, 2013 at 04:50 PM (#4338227)
I still want to know why the ump is wearing a sweater.


And dress shoes.
   145. J.R. Wolf Posted: January 03, 2013 at 04:50 PM (#4338228)
Israel was created to provide a homeland for a persecuted ethnic group that had suffered genocide at the hands of a pack of violent Nazi lunatics.

Today a different group of violent lunatics wants to commit further genocide and finish what the Nazis started.

If there's much of anything in the world that isn't right, this is it.

I'm not Jewish but my father had some Holocaust survivors for friends. Their stories, which included those of a small boy who escaped the Nazis by crawling out from under a pile of his dead relatives and then hid in a forest until American troops finally arrived, a man who suffered bizarre painful medical experiments, two men who were tortured, and a woman who was raped not only for more times but for more days than she could count have made me very sympathetic to Israel. There are, of course, over six million other reasons as well.

Leaving out that they are the only democracy in the Middle East and our only ally there, Israel deserves our support in the name of justice not only because of what happened before but also to make damned sure that it never, ever happens again.
   146. J.R. Wolf Posted: January 03, 2013 at 04:55 PM (#4338233)
MacArthur never advocated the use of nuclear weapons. This is a myth. See "Senate Committees on Armed Services and Foreign Relations, 15 May 1951—Military Situation in the Far East, hearings, 82d Congress, 1st session, part 1, p. 77."
   147. Nasty Nate Posted: January 03, 2013 at 04:56 PM (#4338234)
I still want to know why the ump is wearing a sweater.


I don't know that we can assume that it's the ump. It could be a William Ligue situation and the pitcher is trying to save the day by taking him out with a baseball to the temple.
   148. Gold Star - just Gold Star Posted: January 03, 2013 at 05:01 PM (#4338242)
Leaving out that they are the only democracy in the Middle East and our only ally there...
Doesn't the alliance with the Israelis kind of blow any chances to pick up more allies in the ME?
   149. Gold Star - just Gold Star Posted: January 03, 2013 at 05:06 PM (#4338246)
Today a different group of violent lunatics wants to commit further genocide...
I swear I thought this would end with denunciation of Israeli-on-Palestinian violence and a nod to the irony of it all.
   150. AuntBea Posted: January 03, 2013 at 05:16 PM (#4338255)
Israel is now facing a conflict between being a Jewish state and a democracy. They are not choosing democracy.

And if you mean "ethnic cleansing", it is happening again. Right now, to the Palestinians.

It's laughable that we in the US call this the Israel/Palestine conflict, as if there were two equal parties. The Isreali position is so dominant that there is only really one party to the conflict. The only thing that will resolve it is Israel choosing to resolve the conflict themselves, or international pressure finally getting so great that the choice is forced upon them. The Palestinians have always been irrelevant.
   151. The Chronicles of Reddick Posted: January 03, 2013 at 05:18 PM (#4338261)
Kessler even says at the end that he wasn't sure whether to give him any pinocchios, but just decided to anyway because his statement sounds "paradoxical" and he's being "too clever." I'd call that projection.


Ok because I read into it as him being more critical of the White House proclaiming this as a victory when it seems like that they along with Congress "punted" for another 2 months of posturing.
   152. Commissioner Bud Black Beltre Hillman Posted: January 03, 2013 at 05:20 PM (#4338263)
The Israeli people certainly deserve peace, safety and our support towards those ends. They also deserve supporters who are willing to question whether the governments current strategy is actually bringing them any closer to peace and safety.
   153. Rickey! In a van on 95 south... Posted: January 03, 2013 at 05:21 PM (#4338266)
I still want to know why the ump is wearing a sweater.


I still want to know why folks considered the cartoon to be "unduly inflammatory".


Umpires in sweaters are clear trolls.
   154. Commissioner Bud Black Beltre Hillman Posted: January 03, 2013 at 05:23 PM (#4338270)
Thx Rickey/Sam, but if JR or HW could explain what they considered inflammatory, it would be appreciated.
   155. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 03, 2013 at 05:24 PM (#4338271)
Israel is now facing a conflict between being a Jewish state and a democracy. They are not choosing democracy.

Since a democracy would be a death (or exile) sentence for Israeli Jews, can you blame them?
   156. Rickey! In a van on 95 south... Posted: January 03, 2013 at 05:25 PM (#4338272)
I'm not Jewish but my father had some Holocaust survivors for friends. Their stories, which included those of a small boy who escaped the Nazis by crawling out from under a pile of his dead relatives and then hid in a forest until American troops finally arrived, a man who suffered bizarre painful medical experiments, two men who were tortured, and a woman who was raped not only for more times but for more days than she could count have made me very sympathetic to Israel. There are, of course, over six million other reasons as well.


I believe we're all willing to stipulate that the Nazis were bad people and refuse to invite them to any dinner parties.

Leaving out that they are the only democracy in the Middle East


Turkey exists.

and our only ally there


Turkey still exists.

Israel deserves our support in the name of justice not only because of what happened before but also to make damned sure that it never, ever happens again.


Israel deserves US support only insofar as support of Israel advances US goals in the region or US positions on international law and cooperation between nations. The crimes of Germans, 75 years past, is not an issue at hand.
   157. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: January 03, 2013 at 05:44 PM (#4338295)
It's laughable that we in the US call this the Israel/Palestine conflict, as if there were two equal parties. The Isreali position is so dominant that there is only really one party to the conflict. The only thing that will resolve it is Israel choosing to resolve the conflict themselves, or international pressure finally getting so great that the choice is forced upon them. The Palestinians have always been irrelevant.

This goes to my point earlier about nonviolent resistance. If a true leader emerged who could convince the Palestinians to adopt a serious nonviolent resistance strategy, the international pressure on Israel would ramp up quickly and Israel would be forced to cut a deal in a very short period of time.
   158. spike Posted: January 03, 2013 at 05:45 PM (#4338297)
Wouldn't Egypt be considered a democracy and an ally of the US?
   159. zonk Posted: January 03, 2013 at 05:54 PM (#4338306)
Turkey exists.


Heh... The Turks really get no respect...

IIRC, the first addition to NATO beyond the founding members - with a direct border against the USSR, no less, a fully functioning democracy... and all anyone in the US ever seems to think of regarding Turkey is either the repulsing of the Ottoman invaders into the Balkans 500 years ago or the movie Midnight Express.

   160. AuntBea Posted: January 03, 2013 at 05:57 PM (#4338311)
This goes to my point earlier about nonviolent resistance. If a true leader emerged who could convince the Palestinians to adopt a serious nonviolent resistance strategy, the international pressure on Israel would ramp up quickly and Israel would be forced to cut a deal in a very short period of time.


Israel will not let this happen.

   161. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: January 03, 2013 at 06:02 PM (#4338315)
The crimes of Germans, 75 years past, is not an issue at hand.

The crimes weren't merely committed by Germans, and one is hard-pressed to see why the crimes are not "an issue at hand."

In what sense are the Holocaust and the ancillary atrocities and cowardly passivities (*) of the WWII era not "an issue at hand." That's ridiculous.

(*) Some engaged in by the United States.
   162. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 03, 2013 at 06:07 PM (#4338320)
The crimes weren't merely committed by Germans, and one is hard-pressed to see why the crimes are not "an issue at hand."

In what sense are the Holocaust and the ancillary atrocities and cowardly passivities (*) of the WWII era not "an issue at hand." That's ridiculous.

(*) Some engaged in by the United States.


No one living bears any guilt for the events of 70 years ago. However, they certainly are a relevant issue in regards to the reasonable fears of the Israelis. Just like the Soviet Terrors and genocide make Polish and Ukranians fearful of being ruled by Russians.
   163. Rickey! In a van on 95 south... Posted: January 03, 2013 at 06:07 PM (#4338321)
Wouldn't Egypt be considered a democracy and an ally of the US?


I intentionally avoided Egypt, another democratishy nation in the region that is, yes, an ally of the United States. I did this in an attempt to avoid unhinged tangents about the Muslim Brotherhood and Egypt post-Arab Spring.
   164. Rickey! In a van on 95 south... Posted: January 03, 2013 at 06:10 PM (#4338325)
The crimes weren't merely committed by Germans,


Pedantic much?

I believe we are all willing to stipulate that the Nazis were bad men who shouldn't be invited to cocktail parties. Even if we still have a soft spot for ska.

and one is hard-pressed to see why the crimes are not "an issue at hand."


As a historical marker, sure. As a marker of cultural sensitivities, sure. As a justification for the state of Israel's ongoing ethnic cleansing of the Levant?

No.
   165. Rickey! In a van on 95 south... Posted: January 03, 2013 at 06:11 PM (#4338326)
No one living bears any guilt for the events of 70 years ago.


See. I'm not even making a Ratzinger jibe here! (Because you're actually right on the merits on this occasion.)
   166. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: January 03, 2013 at 06:11 PM (#4338328)
Wouldn't Egypt be considered a democracy and an ally of the US?

It's never been both at the same time. It was hardly a democracy when Mubarak was in power. It may already be or eventually become a democracy. That's in question. What's in question as well is whether it will continue to be an ally of the US whether or not it becomes a democracy.
   167. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: January 03, 2013 at 06:13 PM (#4338331)
I assume all these purported Palestinians are welcome in Jordan, their historical homeland.
   168. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 03, 2013 at 06:18 PM (#4338341)
See. I'm not even making a Ratzinger jibe here! (Because you're actually right on the merits on this occasion.)

Since when has that stopped you? Turning over a new leaf for your New Year's resolution?
   169. Rickey! In a van on 95 south... Posted: January 03, 2013 at 06:18 PM (#4338344)
I assume all these purported Palestinians are welcome in Jordan, their historical homeland.


Your position is duly noted.
   170. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: January 03, 2013 at 06:19 PM (#4338345)
As a historical marker, sure. As a marker of cultural sensitivities, sure. As a justification for the state of Israel's ongoing ethnic cleansing of the Levant?

No.


As you are wont to do, you've simply regurgitated provocative language -- OMG TEH ETHNIC CLEANSING!!! -- you only apply to white people and Jews. Everything they do is couched in such language, everything bad done by non-white people is somehow the fault of white people and Jews.

You've become a broken record, one that sounds (credit to DMN) suspiciously like the collected compositions of Katrina vanden Heuvel's cabin boy. Snore.


Pedantic much?

I believe we are all willing to stipulate that the Nazis were bad men who shouldn't be invited to cocktail parties. Even if we still have a soft spot for ska.



I guess I wasn't "pedantic" enough, since it didn't seem to register. The crimes of that hideous era were committed by nations and peoples other than merely the Germans.
   171. Rickey! In a van on 95 south... Posted: January 03, 2013 at 06:20 PM (#4338347)
Since when has that stopped you? Turning over a new leaf for your New Year's resolution?


God no. I just gave you a break because you were supporting my case in this instance. Expect no mercy going forward.
   172. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 03, 2013 at 06:21 PM (#4338350)
I guess I wasn't "pedantic" enough, since it didn't seem to register. The crimes of that hideous era were committed by nations and peoples other than merely the Germans.

The Germans certainly had non-German collaborators, but many Germans suffered as well. Why don't we just say "Nazi atrocities"?
   173. McCoy Posted: January 03, 2013 at 06:21 PM (#4338351)
Heh... The Turks really get no respect...

Hey, Turkey conquered Europe! Absorbed almost all of Russia, took all of the Austrian empire, has all of Italy, and most if not all of Germany. No one can stand up against the mighty juggernaut that is Turkey!
   174. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: January 03, 2013 at 06:24 PM (#4338354)
I assume all these purported Palestinians are welcome in Jordan, their historical homeland.

The Golda Meir explanation, "There were no such thing as Palestinians." What's your point?

There were Arabs living in what has become Israel for thousands of years before the establishment of the state of Israel, and I'm sure those Arabs would happily become part of Jordan or Syria if that involved Jordan or Syria getting back all the land that was theirs before the British and French mandates.

   175. Rickey! In a van on 95 south... Posted: January 03, 2013 at 06:25 PM (#4338355)
I guess I wasn't "pedantic" enough, since it didn't seem to register. The crimes of that hideous era were committed by nations and peoples other than merely the Germans.


The genocide of West African slavery was committed by more powers of the day than America. The genocide of the American Indians was committed by more than just Americans. The genocide of the Jews (and Roma) was committed by more than just the Germans. (There was a long, lovingly established history of killing Jews in Europe long before Hitler came around, of course. Christendom loved them some pogroms.)

In the conversation at hand, with specific regard to the Holocaust, it is generally understood that "Nazis" and "Germans" are acceptable shorthand for "the evils of men that led to Buchenwald."

As you are wont to do, you've simply regurgitated provocative language -- OMG TEH ETHNIC CLEANSING!!! -- you only apply to white people and Jews. Everything they do is couched in such language, everything bad done by non-white people is somehow the fault of white people and Jews.


I've never said anything of the sort, Billy Boy. I'm simply using terms to describe X as X, regardless of who is perpetrating X.
   176. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 03, 2013 at 06:31 PM (#4338360)
God no. I just gave you a break because you were supporting my case in this instance. Expect no mercy going forward.

Thank God! I thought you'd had a stroke or something.
   177. Tripon Posted: January 03, 2013 at 06:33 PM (#4338361)
Apparently, one of the Democrats voted for Colin Powell for Minority Speaker.
   178. Rickey! In a van on 95 south... Posted: January 03, 2013 at 06:34 PM (#4338362)
Thank God! I thought you'd had a stroke or something.


In which Snapper admits that it would require significant limitation of oxygen to the brain to make a man compliment the Pope...
   179. zonk Posted: January 03, 2013 at 06:37 PM (#4338365)
I'll just offer without intending to tweak anyone directly (or perhaps intending to tweak everyone) --

It's interesting to read the opinions of what role the horrific events of the Holocaust 75 years ago (and let's be fair and go further - the simmering lead-up in various forms to that culminating horror that spans centuries) should have on our judgment of Israel, leeway it should perhaps provide them on foreign policy, etc...

...then juxtapose that against say... the AA community's reaction to some of the various voter suppression/'voter verification' efforts of the lasst few cycles.

I'll grant the situations are not directly analogous - mainly because the freed slaves of 150 years ago weren't smart enough to demand Alabama as a homeland, I guess...

But - I'm betting that if I took this:

Israel deserves our support in the name of justice not only because of what happened before but also to make damned sure that it never, ever happens again.


and simply translated the exact same thought process into an objection to say -- voter ID laws, i.e:


Black voters deserves our support in the name of justice not only because of what happened before but also to make damned sure that it never, ever happens again.


We'd have an argument.

My own personal cards on the table?

I, yes, tend to agree that Israel has a unique need for and reason to think it needs an extra level of security that other nations don't.... However, I also think the same applies to Native Americans... African-Americans... etc. I also think it applies to Palestinians who were uprooted so this new nation could be formed.

   180. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: January 03, 2013 at 06:39 PM (#4338367)
I assume all these purported Palestinians are welcome in Jordan, their historical homeland.

The Golda Meir explanation, "There were no such thing as Palestinians." What's your point?


Well where's their state in Jordan? The Heebs are supposed to give up what they've fought for, how about the monarchy in Jordan which professes such deep sympathy for the Palestinian plight? That should be a no-brainer, as the freedom-fighters have just as much historic claim to that land and the current rightful owner is openly supportive of their cause. So, you know, draw it up Abdullah, what are you waiting for? People are suffering - SUFFERING - to reclaim their land from you.

Unless, of course...well, I think you know the real reason now don't jou?

There were Arabs living in what has become Israel for thousands of years before the establishment of the state of Israel


And there were Israelis living there before the Arabs, certainly before Muslims, those Johnny-come-lately cultists.

I'm sure those Arabs would happily become part of Jordan or Syria if that involved Jordan or Syria getting back all the land that was theirs before the British and French mandates.


Sounds like someone wants Jordan and Syria to lose another war, perhaps a little more decisively this time. Good thing you bellicose hotheads in comfy chairs don't have the ear of the American natives, who were, after all, here first.
   181. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: January 03, 2013 at 06:43 PM (#4338368)
Leaving out that they are the only democracy in the Middle East


not true

plus, "democracy"
in 1967 they captured the West Bank and Gaza, did the people LIVING THERE ever get the right to vote in Israeli election while those areas were Israeli controlled? NO. However, Jews who settled in those areas still got to vote in Israeli elections
do you see anything amiss with that on democratic grounds?

Israel was created to provide a homeland for a persecuted ethnic group that had suffered genocide at the hands of a pack of violent Nazi lunatics.


personally what I think should have been done was carve out a region of Germany (perhaps one bordering France or Luxembourg) and given that to European Jews- the Germans living there could have been expelled, they had it coming, and besides expelling Germans from regions in Europe in the late 40s was the acceptable thing to do...

No instead, what was done was a million refugees were dropped smack dab in the middle of a population that had nothing to do with the Holocaust...
   182. Rickey! In a van on 95 south... Posted: January 03, 2013 at 06:46 PM (#4338371)
Sounds like someone wants Jordan and Syria to lose another war, perhaps a little more decisively this time. Good thing you bellicose hotheads in comfy chairs don't have the ear of the American natives, who were, after all, here first.


Sounds like someone's a militant supporter of the Israeli state and has no moral compunction about any crimes that state commits against others. Because, you know, Jerusalem was totally Jewish in 90 AD and ####.
   183. Rickey! In a van on 95 south... Posted: January 03, 2013 at 06:47 PM (#4338372)
personally what I think should have been done was carve out a region of Germany


Prague.
   184. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: January 03, 2013 at 06:50 PM (#4338375)
No instead, what was done was a million refugees were dropped smack dab in the middle of a population that had nothing to do with the Holocaust...

The population that had nothing to do with the Holocaust had no interest in living in peace with the Jews that came to Palestine before the 1940s.
   185. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: January 03, 2013 at 06:53 PM (#4338377)
Because, you know, Jerusalem was totally Jewish in 90 AD and ####.


I didn't see any formal statute of limitations in #174, to which I was replying. Do you want to offer one?
   186. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 03, 2013 at 06:57 PM (#4338383)
(178) Sam the way your brain works I'd think a temporary lack of O2 can only help :-)
   187. Rickey! In a van on 95 south... Posted: January 03, 2013 at 07:08 PM (#4338388)
I didn't see any formal statute of limitations in #174, to which I was replying. Do you want to offer one?


Nope. We should give it all back to the Assyrians, clearly.
   188. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: January 03, 2013 at 07:26 PM (#4338398)
No instead, what was done was a million refugees were dropped smack dab in the middle of a population that had nothing to do with the Holocaust...

Come on. That's more than a little misleading.
   189. Srul Itza Posted: January 03, 2013 at 07:31 PM (#4338400)
I also think it applies to Palestinians who were uprooted so this new nation could be formed.


Some were uprooted. Some chose to get out of the way of the invading Arab armies, so that when the Jews were pushed into the sea, they could come back and claim the property for themselves.

a million refugees were dropped smack dab in the middle of a population that had nothing to do with the Holocaust


Not quite. Jews have been living in the Palestine Mandate forever, and were moving back there long before the Holocaust. Between 1944 and 1946, there were around 550,000 to 600,000 Jews in that area, many of whom had long been there. After the establishment of Israel, many more moved in.

Meanwhile, Egypt controlled the Gaza Strip and Jordan controlled the West Bank from 1948-1967. At no time did they make any effort to turn those territories over to the Palestinians as a state. If they had, the dynamic might have been far different.

Now, Israel needs to finish disengaging from Gaza and the West Bank, let the Palestinians have a state, tell the Settlers to get out or accept a new landlord, and make it clear that attacks on Israel from the State of Palestine will be responded to, vigorously.

For now, Israel seems incapable of doing so. One can only hope that it will change.
   190. NattyBoh Posted: January 03, 2013 at 07:32 PM (#4338401)
Nope. We should give it all back to the Assyrians, clearly.


The Assyrians were the Nazis of the ancient Middle East. Lord Byron wrote a pretty mean poem about them.
   191. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: January 03, 2013 at 07:40 PM (#4338407)
The population that had nothing to do with the Holocaust had no interest in living in peace with the Jews that came to Palestine before the 1940s.


which kind of indicates that bringing in a million more could be a bit problematic dontcha think?

and the Lakota in the 19th century really had no interest in living in peace with "us" IN THEIR LAND
oh they didn't mind the odd trapper who came by every now and then, but when people just started moving in, fencing off land and saying, "mine" that kind of ticked them off, they fought us
and lost, badly
in the end it sucked to be the Lakota who simply had less military power.

The Palestinians are in the same situation that the Lakota were in, and the Apaches, and the Seminoles,
hell Snapper can relate to this- the Palestinians are in the same, if not worse position than Irish Catholics were in, IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY, Ireland, when the Brits took over and decided that only Protestants (i.e., English Settlers, Scottish settlers) could own land and vote.


Uniquely, some people expect the Palestinians to be the only people in the history of the world to meekly accept that status in their own land, without complaint.

I'm not saying the Pales haven't behaved badly, they have, they've also badly miscalculated, but there are very very very few people on earth who would meekly sit back and let some other people come in, take over, turn you into 2nd class citizens in your own land, and not make some kind of fuss about it.
   192. Lassus Posted: January 03, 2013 at 07:44 PM (#4338412)
Some were uprooted. Some chose to get out of the way of the invading Arab armies, so that when the Jews were pushed into the sea, they could come back and claim the property for themselves.

Asking seriously, not snarkily, do you have an opinion of what these percentages are?
   193. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: January 03, 2013 at 07:45 PM (#4338413)
Uniquely, some people expect the Palestinians to be the only people in the history of the world to meekly accept that status in their won land, without complaint.

I think the opposite is true -- the Palestinians' complaints have been taken far more seriously than almost any other people who have been occupied and/or uprooted. (and I agree with Srul that those claims have merit and that Israel needs to get out of the West Bank and Gaza.)
   194. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: January 03, 2013 at 07:49 PM (#4338417)
Meanwhile, Egypt controlled the Gaza Strip and Jordan controlled the West Bank from 1948-1967. At no time did they make any effort to turn those territories over to the Palestinians as a state.


Sure, things could have been different in lots of ways
The original partition plan could have been accepted, the Arabs got the land where they were 50%+, and the Jews got the land where they were 50%+, the Jews agreed, the Arabs said no way in hell, that's on them (and many, not the yahoos running Hamas of course, but many others have realized and admitted that was a mistake)- Hell Lebanon was also specifically gerrymandered as well to create a country with a non-Muslim majority... at the time it seemed to work, but blew up big time in the 70s.

Jordan *could* have taken everyone living the land controlled by Jordan, said everyone was a Jordanian citizen, able to buy/sell land, work etc... but they didn't. So could Egypt- hell with Nasser's pan-Arab philosophy he *SHOULD* have been the one to do it, nope.

So yes, a big reason we have this problem NOW, is because of mistakes made 60+ years ago.

   195. Srul Itza Posted: January 03, 2013 at 07:57 PM (#4338421)
Asking seriously, not snarkily, do you have an opinion of what these percentages are?


No idea. No idea how many fled in terror after Deir Yassin (and other, less well-known massacres); how many self-deported because they refused to live under a Jewish administration; how many left because they thought they would be returning; and how many fled the fighting because that is what large civilian populations do, when they can, if a war is coming.

I think the number who left, expecting to come back and take over, is probably a lot less than the number who just wanted to get out of the way of the fighting.
   196. Srul Itza Posted: January 03, 2013 at 07:58 PM (#4338422)
Jordan *could* have taken everyone living the land controlled by Jordan, said everyone was a Jordanian citizen, able to buy/sell land, work etc... but they didn't. So could Egypt- hell with Nasser's pan-Arab philosophy he *SHOULD* have been the one to do it, nope.


They didn't need to make them citizens of Egypt or Jordan; they could have given the land over and turned it into a Palestinian state.
   197. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: January 03, 2013 at 08:08 PM (#4338426)
I am familiar with David's common tactics to wrapping himself in legalistic parsing to avoid honest debate. It's not a new trick for him. No one with a passing familiarity with me would have honestly misread my statement above. David is parsing, because lawyers gotta hide behind something to prevent folks from noticing their lack of intellectual robes.
JSLF was being charitable. Your "wrong" can really only be interpreted the way I did; the only way to interpret it as something else is to assume you're an incompetent writer who can't say what you mean. Of course, that's true, and none of this changes the fact that your understanding of Israel is embarrassingly wrong.


Except no sizeable or influential segment of the Israeli population supports driving Arabs out of the region, or even the West Bank.

You mean except the Settler movement, which runs the entire right wing policy goal setting process, which is strongly supported by the majority government of Israel, from Lieberman through Netenyahu?
See, like this. I apologize for accusing you of getting your information from the Nation; this is so cartoonish and sophomoric that it must come from Mad Magazine or something.
   198. AuntBea Posted: January 03, 2013 at 08:28 PM (#4338436)
Is this seriously how you interact with others David? No wonder nobody listens to you anymore
   199. DevilInABlueCap Posted: January 03, 2013 at 09:29 PM (#4338473)
In domestic news, the House GOP let the Violence Against Women Act expire. But women should definitely vote Republican and there is no War On Women. (The updated VAWA also had more protection for transgendered and male victims of domestic violence, which is sorely needed.)
   200. RollingWave Posted: January 03, 2013 at 09:59 PM (#4338502)
I think the opposite is true -- the Palestinians' complaints have been taken far more seriously than almost any other people who have been occupied and/or uprooted. (and I agree with Srul that those claims have merit and that Israel needs to get out of the West Bank and Gaza.)


There is also Tibet, though there wasn't much uprooting there in reality.

Page 2 of 29 pages  < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Dingbat_Charlie
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogMorosi: MLB must evolve to let players express themselves without rebuke
(17 - 11:15am, Apr 21)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

NewsblogDoug Glanville: I Was Racially Profiled in My Own Driveway
(421 - 11:13am, Apr 21)
Last: The Id of SugarBear Blanks

NewsblogIvan Nova’s season in jeopardy after tearing elbow ligament
(12 - 11:13am, Apr 21)
Last: Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread March, 2014
(964 - 11:12am, Apr 21)
Last: ursus arctos

NewsblogJ.R. Gamble: Albert Pujols' 500-Homer Chase Is A Bore, But That's Baseball's Fault
(2 - 11:09am, Apr 21)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 4-21-2014
(28 - 11:09am, Apr 21)
Last: Rennie's Tenet

NewsblogOTP April 2014: BurstNET Sued for Not Making Equipment Lease Payments
(1745 - 11:09am, Apr 21)
Last: Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora

NewsblogMinuteman News Center: Giandurco: This means WAR
(97 - 11:08am, Apr 21)
Last: tshipman

NewsblogBryce Harper benched for 'lack of hustle' despite quad injury
(109 - 11:01am, Apr 21)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogGleeman: Mets minor league team is hosting “Seinfeld night”
(162 - 11:00am, Apr 21)
Last: You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR)

NewsblogVIDEO: Brewers, Pirates brawl after Carlos Gomez triple
(119 - 10:59am, Apr 21)
Last: Harveys Wallbangers

NewsblogDeadspin: Here is a Chicken Playing Baseball
(1 - 10:52am, Apr 21)
Last: RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)

NewsblogOMNICHATTER for APRIL 21, 2014
(4 - 10:48am, Apr 21)
Last: Rickey! In a van on 95 south...

NewsblogDaniel Bryan's 'YES!' chant has spread to the Pirates' dugout
(138 - 10:11am, Apr 21)
Last: You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR)

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 1953 Ballot
(1 - 10:04am, Apr 21)
Last: DL from MN

Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats

 

 

 

 

Page rendered in 0.9434 seconds
52 querie(s) executed