Does really need to be said that Israel is predominantly Jewish?
Posted By: Lu on 2009-01-07 In Reply to:Correction...(sm) - Just the big bad
When I speak of Israel, I speak of the Jews.
You Said: "And yes, I did bring Hitler into the conversation. He systematically tied to wipe out a group of people, which is exactly what Israel is doing right now."
That statement is exactly what makes you anti-Semitic. The fact that you can compare Israel to Nazi Germany is obscene and anti-Semitic. You are using something horrific done to the Jews (who make up 75% or more of the Israeli population) and using it to illustrate what you perceive is going on in the Gaza Strip. Can you not find some other means to make your point other than conjuring up prejudice perpetrated by Hitler? Could you have maybe made your comparison to Kosovo/Bosnia? Nope, you chose the holocaust to illustrate your point. You intent was to shock and to be controversial. You wanted to provoke a reaction.
What exactly did you think using the name "Hitler" would provoke? You argument in and of itself is anti-Semitic.
By the way, I am a messianic Jew. I know a little bit about anti-Semitism. So before you continue to insult both my intelligence and my homeland, choose your words wisely.
Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old. To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database There's an old Jewish saying. TI
Prepare yourself with truth before you argue. You speak about debate, but I haven't seen any real debate here. A lot of hysteria. A lot of disinformation. No debate. Israel is not an ally because we haven't sent troops to Iraq. When I finished laughing about that, I had to be disturbed from the lack of real knowledge among you. You get all your facts from news sources, I am guessing most of them partisan. I am not only speaking to you but to other posters here. You give yourselves names like Liberal and Democrat and you speak from political points and not humanity. There is no humanity in your words. You have no idea what goes on in Israel. Unless you are there or have lived and breathed there, or know what the struggles are from minute to minute, you know only what you read. That is the truth. My Jooish friends and I won't bother to educate you. You already know everything and my time here is wasted. It's a big contest about who can paste here articles they find that say what they want. Whether they be true or no. Les enfants israeliens meurent aussi.
I didn't say because you were Jewish
I said it's not right to think that Christianity should be taken out of everything just because you don't agree.
And you did say that you are getting "Christian things shoved down your throat" everywhere. Usually when you say something is shoved down your throat it means you take offense to it.
I have a serious question to ask you though - do you not believe in Jesus? If not, what is the reasoning as far as you are concerned for getting into heaven? I mean what are the requirements from a Jewish point of view? I'm asking this in all honesty, not sarcastically or anything like that.
Not all Jewish grandparents think the way you do
@@
Republican Jewish Ad
What's with all this hating of the Jews, anyway? Sickening!
So, gt, are YOU the Jewish expert on this board. sm
So what are your thoughts on Gaza and it's historical and Biblical significance? Do you think Egypt will encroach upon the left bank? How about Hamas and their recent aggressive actions. Do you think they will rebuilt Gaza? What do you think about the relocation of the Gaza settlers? What is the significance of losing Gaza? Do you think the Arabs will uphold their part of the peace agreement, and if so, why? Don't you think Sharon is doomed as far as ever being reelected. Netinyahu is pretty steamed as are most Israeli. Do you think they should vote him back in? Tell us your thoughts.
Jewish Voices For Peace
Not all jews agree with this latest Israeli/Bush aggression, myself included. Check out the web site Jewish Voices For Peace.Org.
Jewish Voice For Peace
It is Jewish Voice For Peace.Org, not Jewish Voices For Peace as I previously posted. Sorry.
try this Republican Jewish Coalition
Not sure why it didn't show up. When I clicked on it here, it worked.
Obama pressures Philly area synagogue to drop RJC Rrepresentative from a ... The RJC has launched a new series of ads raising critical issues for the Jewish... www.rjchq.org/ - 44k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this
Replace Republican with Jewish and think...
Germany. Do you really hate a group of people that much? Really?? That you want to go down the marxist path of quashing or belitting any kind of dissent or disagreement? I thought liberals were all about the right to dissent! Oh...what on earth am I thinking? They are for THEIR right to dissent and dam* anyone who doesn't agree with them.
I was quoting from a Jewish website publication.
It wasn't "my statement." And it made perfect sense if you had read the article. The Gaza strip pull-out was not instigated by the settlers who were moved but by their government which is ISRAELI and is therefore JEWISH. You should read the news a little more.
Arresting officer, who is Jewish, took no offense. sm
He pretty much said what I did below.
Arresting Deputy Didn’t Want To ‘Defame’ Gibson
‘I don’t take pride in hurting Mr. Gibson’ says officer, who is Jewish
MSNBC The Associated Press Updated: 7:56 p.m. PT July 31, 2006
Excerpt:
CALABASAS, Calif. - The deputy who arrested Mel Gibson on suspicion of drunken driving said Monday that he feels bad for damage to the star’s reputation but hopes Gibson thinks twice before drinking and getting behind the wheel.
James Mee, a Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputy, told the Associated Press that he considered it a routine arrest and didn’t take seriously any comments that Gibson made.
Gibson reportedly unleashed an anti-Semitic tirade and made other offensive comments when he was pulled over, initially for speeding, early Friday along the Pacific Coast Highway in Malibu. He was then arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol.
Gibson has issued a public apology for his conduct without specifying what he said or did.
“I don’t take pride in hurting Mr. Gibson,” said Mee, a 17-year deputy who is Jewish. “What I had hoped out of this is that he would think twice before he gets behind the wheel of a car and was drinking. ... I don’t want to ruin his career. I don’t want to defame him in any way or hurt him.”
*snip*
TMZ reported that Gibson said, “The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world,” and asked the arresting officer, “Are you a Jew?”
In the interview outside his home, Mee would not comment specifically on what Gibson said.
“That stuff is booze talking,” the deputy said. “There’s two things that booze does. It amplifies your basic personality. If you are a laid-back kind of person, just an easygoing kind of person, booze is going to amplify that and you’ll be just sitting around going how it’s a wonderful day.
I might be missing something here but I can't find posts by Kfir discussing her Jewish faith. It was all about the war. It was about the state of Israel not about the Jewish religion. Isn't that 2 different things?
Citing U.N. statistics, the IMC said more than 300 children were killed in Lebanon and 1,000 wounded while a further half million youngsters were displaced by battles between Hizbollah guerrillas and Israeli forces in southern Lebanon.
The Israeli Foreign Ministry names eight Israeli children killed by Hizbollah rockets, including two 18-year olds. The total Israeli death toll is estimated at more than 150. It is unclear how many Israeli children were wounded.
The fetus has great value because it is potentially a human life. It gains "full human status at birth only." 2
Abortions are not permitted on the grounds of genetic imperfections of the fetus.
Abortions are permitted to save the mother's life or health.
With the exception of some Orthodox authorities, Judaism supports abortion access for women.
"...each case must be decided individually by a rabbi well-versed in Jewish law." 5
Historical Christianity has considered "ensoulment," the point at which the soul enters the body) as the time when abortions should normally be prohibited. Belief about the timing of this event has varied from the instant of fertilization of the ovum, to 90 days after conception, or later. There has been no consensus among historical Jewish sources about when ensoulment happens. It is regarded as "one of the 'secrets of God' that will be revealed only when the Messiah comes." Jewish family flees Delaware school district's aggressive Christianity
This is terrible. :-(
Jewish family flees Delaware school district's aggressive Christianity
by JewsOnFirst.org, June 28, 2006
Note: On July 11th, we posted two follow-up reports, which you can find here. And on August 23rd, we posted another update here.
Links to articles and documents cited in our report appear immediately below it
A large Delaware school district promoted Christianity so aggressively that a Jewish family felt it necessary to move to Wilmington, two hours away, because they feared retaliation for filing a lawsuit. The religion (if any) of a second family in the lawsuit is not known, because they're suing as Jane and John Doe; they also fear retaliation. Both families are asking relief from state-sponsored religion.
The behavior of the Indian River School District board suggests the families' fears are hardly groundless.
The district spreads over a considerable portion of southern Delaware. The families' complaint, filed in federal court in February 2005, alleges that the district had created an environment of religious exclusion and unconstitutional state-sponsored religion.
Among numerous specific examples in the complaint was what happened at plaintiff Samantha Dobrich's graduation in 2004 from the district's high school. She was the only Jewish student in her graduating class. The complaint relates that local pastor, Jerry Fike, in his invocation, followed requests for our heavenly Father's guidance for the graduates with:
I also pray for one specific student, that You be with her and guide her in the path that You have for her. And we ask all these things in Jesus' name.
In addition to the ruined graduation experience, the Dobrich-Doe lawsuit alleges that:
The district's custom and practice of school-sponsored prayer was frequently imposed on impressionable non-Christian students, which violated their constitutional rights.
The district ignored the Supreme Court's 1992 Lee decision limiting prayer at graduation ceremonies -- even after a district employee complained about the prayer at her child's 2003 graduation..
District teachers and staff led Bible clubs at several schools. Club members got to go to the head of the lunch line.
While Bible clubs were widely available, student book clubs were rare and often canceled by the district.
When Jane Doe complained that her non-Christian son Jordan Doe was left alone when his classmates when to Bible club meetings, district staff insisted that Jordan should attend the club, regardless of his religion.
The district schools attended by Jordan and his sister Jamie Doe distributed Bibles to students in 2003, giving them time off from class to pick up the books.
Prayer --often sectarian -- is a routine part of district sports programs and social events
One of the district's middle schools gave students the choice of attending a special Bible Club if they did not want to attend a lesson on evolution.
A middle school teacher told students there was only one true religion and gave them pamphlets for his surfing ministry.
Samantha Dobrich's honors English teacher frequently discussed Christianity, but no other religion.
Students frequently made mandatory appearances at district board meetings -- where they were a captive audience for board members' prayers to Jesus.
The Dobriches said the prayers to Jesus' ruined the graduation experience for Samantha. Mona Dobrich, Samantha's mother, repeatedly called district officials to complain. A board member told her she would have to get the matter put on a meeting agenda -- then refused to put it on the agenda. The school superintendent slipped the topic onto the agenda and then told Mona Dobrich she would need to raise it during the public comment period.
School board unyielding The board opened the June 15, 2004 meeting at which Dobrich was prepared to speak with a prayer in Jesus' name. The board was not forthcoming to her request that official prayers be in God's name rather than in Jesus' name. The high school athletic director veered from his agenda topic to encourage the board to keep praying in Jesus' name.
Board member Donald Hattier followed Dobrich out and offered to compromise by keeping graduation free of prayers to Jesus. And, according to the complaint, he warned her not to hire a lawyer.
A large crowd turned out for the next board meeting and many people spoke in support of school prayer. Mona Dobrich spoke passionately of her own outsider experience as a student in Indian River District schools and of how hard she'd worked to make sure her children didn't also feel like outsiders.
Hattier again approached her after the meeting. This time, the complaint alleges, he told her he'd spoken with the Rutherford Institute, a religious right legal group.
Talk show calls out a mob The district board announced the formation of a committee to develop a religion policy. And the local talk radio station inflamed the issue.
On the evening in August 2004 when the board was to announce its new policy, hundreds of people turned out for the meetng. The Dobrich family and Jane Doe felt intimidated and asked a state trooper to escort them.
The complaint recounts that the raucous crowd applauded the board's opening prayer and then, when sixth-grader Alexander Dobrich stood up to read a statement, yelled at him: take your yarmulke off! His statement, read by Samantha, confided I feel bad when kids in my class call me Jew boy.
A state representative spoke in support of prayer and warned board members that the people would replace them if they faltered on the issue. Other representatives spoke against separating god and state.
A former board member suggested that Mona Dobrich might disappear like Madalyn Murray O'Hair, the atheist whose Supreme Court case resulted in ending organized school prayer. O'Hair disappeared in 1995 and her dismembered body was found six years later.
The crowd booed an ACLU speaker and told her to go back up north.
In the days after the meeting the community poured venom on the Dobriches. Callers to the local radio station said the family they should convert or leave the area. Someone called them and said the Ku Klux Klan was nearby.
Killing Christ Classmates accused Alex Dobrich of killing Christ and he became fearful about wearing his yarmulke, the complaint recounts. He took it off whenever he saw a police officer, fearing that the officer might see it and pull over his mother's car. When the family went grocery shopping, the complaint says, Alexander would remove the pin holding his yarmulke on his head for fear that someone would grab it and rip out some of his hair.
The Dobriches refinanced their home so that Mona and Alexander could move to Wilmington, away from a situation that had become untenable, according to the complaint; Marco stayed behind because of his job, .
Ultimately, it continues, the expense of two households forced the Dobriches to sell their home. And Samantha was forced to withdraw from the joint program she attended at Columbia University and the Jewish Theological Seminary in New York. She is being treated for depression.
The lawsuit states that the Doe family wants to remain anonymous in order to avoid the retaliation experienced by the Dobrich family. Jordan and Jane Doe are also suffering from depression related to their opposition with the Indian River School District's religion policy.
Elusive religion policy Even after Mona and Alexander Dobrich moved to Wilmington, the family and its lawyers continued to request the district's policy on religion in the schools and to ask for meetings with the board. Their requests were stonewalled, so in February 2005 they filed suit.
In a statement issued through her attorneys and quoted by the Delaware Wave, Mona Dobrichexplained why the families were suing: We are not trying to remove God from the schools or the public square. We simply don't think it is right for the district to impose a particular religious view on impressionable students.
The families seek to recover damages and to compel changes in the school district's policy.
That policy, however, remains elusive.
At the request of a board member soon after the infamous graduation, the Rutherford Institute, prepared a prayer policy for the school board, according to the complaint. In October 2004 the board reportedly adopted a new policy on religion in response to the Dobrich's complaint.
It is unclear if that policy is the one prepared by the Rutherford Institute -- because no one has seen it. The Dobrich's complaint states that the policy was unavailable and when the families requested it the district told them to file a freedom of information request.
This June, the board had a reading of a proposed change in the unseen policy. They said the policy and its changes would be posted on their website, (www.irsd.net) but on June 27th, it was nowhere to be found among several dozen policy documents.
The Rutherford Institute enters the fray At the boisterous August 2004 district board meeting, the head of the Rutherford Institute, John Whitehead, urged the board to set an example for other schools, according to the Daily Times, a local paper.
A Rutherford affiliated lawyer, Thomas Neuberger, came into the case representing one of the school board members. Before he left the case last August (because the judge dismissed the individual board members from the case), Neuberger was reportedly feuding with other lawyers.
While he was in the case, his client, Reginald L. Helms reportedly admitted one of the lawsuit's allegations: that school officials invited Pastor Fike to the 2004 graduation. That undermined the district's claim that students chose the speakers.
Neuberger was quoted by the Delaware Wave newspaper denying that the Dobrich's son Alex was taunted as a Jew by classmates. I seriously doubt that it ever occurred, he told the paper, contending that the plaintiffs were using the allegation used to defame the good citizens who serve on this school board.
In its response to the lawsuit, the district reportedly called some of the families' claims immaterial, impertinent and scandalous, and intended only to cast the district in a negative light.
Settlement rejected In February 2006, the board unanimously rejected a settlement offer that would have required renaming Christmas and Easter breaks to winter and spring, respectively, and to put a Dobrich child at the top of a waiting list for an arts school. It would have permitted board members to continue praying at their meetings. (US District Judge Joseph J. Farnan, Jr., who is hearing the case, ruled last year that the prayer was a historic tradition and could continue.)
In April the board's insurance company, which had been representing the district in the lawsuit, filed suit against it (and the individual board members) because they had, against its advice, rejected the settlement offer. The board then fired the attorneys that had been representing them and hired a new set. The insurance company is reportedly refusing to pay for the board's legal defense from the date the members rejected the settlement offer.
According to the Coastal Point, the insurance company's complaint is sealed, as is the district's response. The district's taxpayers, who will pay the bill if the insurer prevails, cannot know the details of the case.
Attorney Thomas Allingham, who represents the Dobrich family in their case against the school district, says the board's behavior suggests it was not negotiating in good faith. Allingham told JewsOnFirst that several board members attended the settlement negotiations, which were under the auspices of a federal mediator. He said the members approved the settlement during those negotiations. But, when the board voted on the offer, they rejected it unanimously.
Allingham said the plaintiffs remained open to the possibility that the case could be settled. But the case is set for trial in June 2007 in Wilmington.
Board prayer allowed with settlement
By Jonathan Starkey, Coastal Point (Sussex County, Delaware), June 16, 2006
A settlement offered by the plaintiffs in the Dobrich/Doe prayer suit and denied unanimously by the Indian River School board on Feb. 27 would have allowed board members to continue opening monthly meetings with a prayer, a board member and two other sources close to the case told the Coastal Point. Click here for the report (a PDF file).
School board to discuss religion policy
By Jonathan Starkey, Coastal Point (Sussex County, Delaware), June 23, 2006
The policies regarding prayer at graduations and religion in school that were adopted by the Indian River School Board on Oct. 19, 2004, after they heard complaints from a Jewish family, might be amended next week.
The board held a first reading on the amended ordinances Tuesday but deferred a vote until after an executive session on Tuesday, June 27. Board members and district Superintendent Lois Hobbs wouldn’t comment on the specifics of the proposed amendments. Click here for the report (a PDF file).
School prayer lawsuit filed against district
By Sean O'Sullivan, Gannett News Service, Delaware Wave, March 2, 2005
Two sets of parents filed a federal lawsuit in Wilmington on Monday that seeks to bar the Indian River School District from promoting religion at school functions.
The parents, who also are seeking damages, claim in the lawsuit that their rights to free speech and to be free from state-sponsored religion have been violated.
We didn't want a lawsuit, but at this point we feel like we don't have any other choice, said Mona Dobrich, one of the parents, in a statement provided by attorney Thomas J. Allingham. We are not trying to remove God from the schools or the public square. We simply don't think it is right for the district to impose a particular religious view on impressionable students. Continue
School district disputes lawsuit
By Sean O'Sullivan, Gannett News Service, Delaware Wave, May 4, 2005
WILMINGTON -- Indian River school officials have filed papers in federal court denying virtually every claim in a Jewish family's lawsuit over school-sponsored Christian prayer.
John Balaguer, attorney for the school district, also asked a U.S. District judge to strike large sections of the complaint as immaterial, impertinent and scandalous.
Balaguer said the items were included solely to cast the district in a negative light. Continue
ACLU Sues to Stop School Board Prayer: Dobrich v. Walls
Rutherford Institute website entry on the Dobrich case.
JOF note: the ACLU is not involved in the case!
Attorneys for The Rutherford Institute have asked the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware to dismiss a lawsuit recently filed by the ACLU against Reginald Helms in his official capacity as a member of the Indian River School District Board of Education. The lawsuit, which was filed by the ACLU in February 2005 against school board members in their personal and professional capacities, alleges that school- sponsored prayer “has pervaded the life of teachers and students” in the Indian River District schools. In their motion to have the case dismissed, Institute attorneys argue that as a school board member, Helms should have immunity from liability claims under the established doctrine of absolute legislative immunity.
An official with the Indian River School District Board of Education contacted The Rutherford Institute for help in August 2004, after the Wilmington, Del., branch of the ACLU demanded that IRSD board members stop opening their monthly business meetings with a prayer. Attorneys for The Rutherford Institute agreed to represent Reginald Helms, vice president of the IRSD Board of Education, in his individual capacity should the Delaware school district’s practice of opening meetings with a brief prayer be challenged. Despite pressure from the Wilmington chapter of the ACLU to cease issuing prayers at public events, officials with the IRSD opened a school board meeting on Aug. 24, 2004, with a brief invocation. Several hundred members of the community gathered at Frankford Elementary School for the monthly business meeting broke into applause after Board President Harvey Walls asked board member Dr. Donald G. Hattier to lead the board in a word of prayer. Hattier read a prayer given by George Washington during the Revolutionary War. During the business meeting, the board also issued a first reading of a policy concerning school prayer at baccalaureate and commencement ceremonies, which states that student-initiated, student-delivered, voluntary messages may be permitted during graduation ceremonies. Thomas Neuberger, a Rutherford affiliate attorney with the Neuberger Firm, which is based in Wilmington, Del., is defending school board member Reginald Helms against the ACLU’s lawsuit. (link)
Fair Use Statement: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Israel
There are many jews who do not like Sharon, many. I could post what they say about him but I wont. However, posting about great leaders, I grew up loving absolutely loving Golda Meir..The situation in Israel is not ours to decide or get heated about..the situation we need to get heated about is America. To try to tie jews and christians together happily cannot happen. For many many years christians did not even acknowledge jews or their beliefs, now all of a sudden lets get together as we believe as one, however, we do not believe as one, not at all. I have watched this over a few years, the christians are trying to hook onto jews as they think well, we both believe in the Bible so we believe the same. We do not believe the same. First of all, we do not believe in the new testament, we do not believe in hell, many of us do not even believe in a heaven and we do not believe in jesus as a savior. He was a jewish man who taught peace and love and tolerance but nothing more. Our savior has not come yet. I think you truly pray and feel for Israel, however, maybe you can take a few courses of Judaism at a local synagogue and understand us more. I know my local synagogue has courses for non jews to learn more about us.
Oil from Israel
Has anyone researched that? In the coming future, Russia will attack Israel. Those who have researched prophecies of the future of the world believe a gusher of this oil wealth is soon coming from Israel, and Russia (amazingly not called Soviet Union in these prophecies of 1100+ years ago) will form an Islamic alliance (they really don't want to) and will come down from the north and attack unwalled villages, supposedly for this sudden great wealth of oil. However, Israel has built walls all over the place. So, this attack will probably happen after the one world leader soon to appear on the world scene offers a convincing (but false) peace and Israel tears the walls down. I have been to Russia, and it is so different from what was promised to the Russian people back when my parents were very young. Then, it was a revolution similar to what Castro was supposed to have done, and now what Chavez is supposedly doing. I saw the apartments, hospitals, schools, etc., in Russia. Yes, Kruschev said there were no homeless people. I only saw people who had to live in apartments where the government dictated that they live and no freedom to express their opinion. Their cost to live in these apartments - free. Our cost to have the freedom in America to say what we want to - priceless. Anyone remember that guy that wrote, The Late Great Planet Earth, back in the 1970's. He now has a program called International Intelligence Briefing. Check your local/cable listings. If you know of any others like him who have researched this other side of the (global) story, please let me know. Thanks.
Israel was willing........... sm
to give the Gaza Strip to the Palestinians in 2005 and allow them to govern it on their own, but that wasn't good enough for the Palestinians.
China has given us untold amounts of money. Does that mean that China has a say in how our country should be run?
I stand on my previous statements that any country that does not support Israel (and I don't mean just monetarily)is barking up the wrong olive tree.
do you really think it is just to let Israel
take the whole of Palestine? Does not matter what the Bible says!
US, Israel planned ME war
Why does none of this surprise me?
'US, Israel planned ME war' 13/08/2006 11:06 - (SA)
New York - The US government was closely involved in the planning of Israel's military operations against Islamic militant group Hezbollah even before the July 12 kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers, The New Yorker magazine reported in its latest issue.
The kidnapping triggered a month-long Israeli operation in South Lebanon that is expected to come to an end on Monday.
But Pulitzer Prize-winning US journalist Seymour Hersh writes that President George W Bush and vice president Dick Cheney were convinced that a successful Israeli bombing campaign against Hezbollah could ease Israel's security concerns and also serve as a prelude to a potential US pre-emptive attack to destroy Iran's nuclear installations.
Citing an unnamed Middle East expert with knowledge of the current thinking of the Israeli and US governments, Israel had devised a plan for attacking Hezbollah - and shared it with Bush administration officials - well before the July 12 kidnappings.
The expert added that the White House had several reasons for supporting a bombing campaign, the report said.
If there was to be a military option against Iran, it had to get rid of the weapons Hezbollah could use in a potential retaliation against Israel, Hersh writes.
Citing a US government consultant with close ties to Israel, Hersh also reports that earlier this summer, before the Hezbollah kidnappings, several Israeli officials visited Washington to get a green light for a bombing operation following a Hezbollah provocation, and to find out how much the United States would bear.
The Israelis told us it would be a cheap war with many benefits, the magazine quotes the consultant as saying. Why oppose it? We'll be able to hunt down and bomb missiles, tunnels, and bunkers from the air. It would be a demo for Iran.
US government officials have denied the charges.
Nonetheless, Hersh writes, a former senior intelligence official says some officers serving with the Joint Chiefs of Staff remain deeply concerned that the administration will have a far more positive assessment of the air campaign than they should.
There is no way that (defence secretary Donald) Rumsfeld and Cheney will draw the right conclusion about this, the report quotes the former official as saying. When the smoke clears, they'll say it was a success, and they'll draw reinforcement for their plan to attack Iran.
I know that it happens all the time. I am sorry that it does.
You don't have to go to Israel to know right from wrong.
Occupation, blockade, genocidal war of attrition, settlement expansion, diasporas of refugees, no right to return, the wall, imposition of police state, creation of open air prisons/terrorist breeding gounds, countless treaty violations, repeated invasions, plunder of resources, wholesale murderous slaughter featuring killing, generations of widows, widowers and orphans, maiming for life and massive destruction of property...just to name a few things off the top of my head.
Why Israel Fights
Why the Israeli attack helps the US by taking on Hamas now and why this time Israel may succeed in Gaza. A well-written perspective on Gaza, Israel, Hamas. This adds more to consider as we all discuss this war.
Why Israel Fights By WILLIAM KRISTOL Published: January 4, 2009
The Israeli assault on Hamas in Gaza is going to be a replay, we’re told, of the attempt to subdue Hezbollah in southern Lebanon in the summer of 2006. And the outcome, it’s asserted, will be the same: lots of death and destruction, no strategic victory for Israel and a setback for all who seek peace and progress in the Middle East.
Obviously, war is an unpredictable business, so I say this with some trepidation: I think the conventional wisdom will be proved wrong. Israel could well succeed in Gaza.
For one thing, southern Lebanon is a substantial and hilly area, bordered by northern Lebanon and Syria, through which Hezbollah could be re-supplied, both by Syria itself and by Iran. Gaza is a flat, narrow strip, bordered by Israel, as well as by the sea and by Egypt, no friend to Hamas. By cutting off the northern part of Gaza from the southern, Israel has basically surrounded northern Gaza, creating a military situation very different from that in Lebanon in 2006.
What’s more, the Israeli leadership seems aware of the mistakes — political, strategic and military — it made in Lebanon. That doesn’t mean it won’t make them all over again. The same prime minister, Ehud Olmert, is in charge, after all. But, today’s defense minister, Ehud Barak, is very different from his predecessor, the weak and unqualified Amir Peretz. So far as one can tell, the Gaza operation seems to have been well-planned and is being methodically executed, in sharp contrast to the Lebanon incursion. Barak has also warned that the operation could be long and difficult, lowering expectations by contrast with the Israeli rhetoric of July 2006.
In addition, in Lebanon, Israel proclaimed war goals that it couldn’t achieve — such as retrieving its two kidnapped soldiers and disarming Hezbollah. Now the Israeli government says that it seeks to weaken Hamas, lessen its ability to fire rockets from Gaza and secure new arrangements along the Egyptian-Gaza border to prevent Hamas from re-arming. These may well be achievable goals.
And, of course, not all military efforts against terror fail. Recall Israel’s incursion into the West Bank in the spring of 2002, when, under the leadership of Ariel Sharon, Israel succeeded in ripping up established terror networks and began the defeat of the second intifada. Israel also was able to avoid a long-term re-occupation, while retaining the ability to go back in on anti-terror missions. What’s more, the 2002 bloodshed didn’t seem to do lasting damage to hopes for progress or moderation on the West Bank. After all, it’s Gaza, from which Israel withdrew in 2005, not the West Bank, that became a Hamas stronghold.
An Israeli success in Gaza would be a victory in the war on terror — and in the broader struggle for the future of the Middle East. Hamas is only one manifestation of the rise, over the past few decades, of a terror-friendly and almost death-cult-like form of Islamic extremism. The combination of such terror movements with a terror-sponsoring and nuclear-weapons-seeking Iranian state (aided by its sidekick Syria) has produced a new kind of threat to Israel.
But not just to Israel. To everyone in the Middle East — very much including Muslims — who aren’t interested in living under the sway of extremist regimes. And to any nation, like the United States, that is a target of Islamic terror. So there are sound reasons why the United States — whether led by George W. Bush or Barack Obama — will stand with Israel as it fights.
But Israel — assuming it succeeds — is doing the United States a favor by taking on Hamas now.
The huge challenge for the Obama administration is going to be Iran. If Israel had yielded to Hamas and refrained from using force to stop terror attacks, it would have been a victory for Iran. If Israel were now to withdraw under pressure without accomplishing the objectives of severely weakening Hamas and preventing the reconstitution of a terror-exporting state in Gaza, it would be a triumph for Iran. In either case, the Iranian regime would be emboldened, and less susceptible to the pressure from the Obama administration to stop its nuclear program.
But a defeat of Hamas in Gaza — following on the heels of our success in Iraq — would be a real setback for Iran. It would make it easier to assemble regional and international coalitions to pressure Iran. It might positively affect the Iranian elections in June. It might make the Iranian regime more amenable to dealing.
With respect to Iran, Obama may well face — as the Israeli government did with Hamas — a moment when the use of force seems to be the only responsible option. But Israel’s willingness to fight makes it more possible that the United States may not have to.
the U.N. overstepped its bounds? And what about the United Kingdom that controlled the area in the early 1900s?
Like it or not nations are formed through civil war. There are winners and there are losers. It's really very simple. The process has not changed for centuries and it will never change. The strong prevail. The righteous prevail. The minute we take a liberal viewpoint, that's the exact minute we become weak.
I have studied U.S./Israel relations extensively. I fully understand that the protestors do not share my point of view as well as you. From reading your copious posts I am very clear on where you stand. I will not be so presumptious as to think I know your biography, but you obviously believe everything wrong in the world has U.S. origins. I believe you are wrong beyond a shadow of a doubt, but I will not try to change your mind. Since liberals in general are so worried about how the rest of the world thinks about us I will bring to your attention that it becomes ever more clear by your stances and views as with those on the extreme left that you all side with terrorism. You can spin it any way you want, but you come off as supporting terrorists.
This describes most experts on Israel. TI
A breyre hob ich (I have no alternative), the mind is closed here. It is not really such a phenomenon. All is bashert (predestined). Even in the Jewish community, there is division. The Jews in the United States, many of them, have lost communion with the Jews left in Israel, though we are seeing some coming back, rediscovering the cause. Then have a benken (longing, yearning) inside them and they are drawn back to the homeland. They are welcome. As for what is said here, it is really not debate at all is it? It was silly of me to have tried. There are better battles and bigger stakes than most imagine. Alaichem sholom (peace to you). If it please Hashem.
oops: I did mean Israel & Iran.
Afghanistan & Pakistan are no picnic, either.
What makes you think Israel will succeed in
"defeating" the Palestinians this time around. Bullying swagger and bravado certainly won't make it so. Goliath has not been able to slay David in the last 60 years. You think they will pick up their marbles and go quietly into the night? There is only one thing that can change the course of this cycling hell-on-earth.
REPEAT: It's the occupation. End it or live in fear for all eternity.
I lived in Israel for many years
and what has happened has more to do with the upcoming election in Israel than with the US. Check it out.
Wrong again! With or without the U.S., Israel will always prevail.
Just keep watching. Obama will withdrawal American support from Israel, I'm sure, and Israel will STILL prevail.
Israel will prevail.......it is ordained by God
And even Obama can't do anything about that but that's not to say Israel hasn't done its share of manipulating the Arabs....they helped form Hamas for the purpose of overthrowing the PLO and look where it got them...... more trouble!
No, it is not, but US supports Israel every year with
billions of dollars and the newest military technology.
Former Israeli administrations already agreed to a 2-state solution. The Palestinians would get the Westbank as their state. Instead of keeping their promise, Israel started to build the 20-meter-high separation wall and building settlements for the Israelis.
Obama wants this to stop and Netanyahu does not want to comply as a hardline right-winger. It is Netanyahu who wants the whole occupied Palestine for Israel and does not want a 2-state solution. He wouldn't even 'utter' the term ƈ-state solution,' not even when he was discussing this issue with Obama in Washington; he just circled around it.
This does not come out of my head, I am very literate, informed, I look around what is going on in the world, always, I am tolerant and fair. You are wrong: Obama is not against Israel,
he is for a 2-state solution: The Westbank and Gaza for the Palestinians, ALL the rest for Israel. I think that the Palestinians have a right to a 'small' part of Palestine, as they were the first to be in the Holy Land and there were several agreements under previous US administrations, also Bush's, that implemented this right.
Why should Israel have it all and the Palestinians nothing? Where should the Palestinians go who live in the by Isreal occupied territories that were promised to them? This constant back and forth struggle between Israel and the Palestinians, especially the Israeli attacks on Gaza, have the goal to make whole Palestine an Israeli state.
Even on the Israeli side there are a lot of voices who think that the Palestinians have a right to their own state and admit that bringing this problem to a solution (2-state) will solve a lot of problems, as it constitutes the root problem in the Middle East.
It is all about justice and fairness!
You are wrong: Obama is not against Israel,
he is for a 2-state solution: The Westbank and Gaza for the Palestinians, ALL the rest for Israel. I think that the Palestinians have a right to a 'small' part of Palestine, as they were the first to be in the Holy Land and there were several agreements under previous US administrations, also Bush's, that implemented this right.
Why should Israel have it all and the Palestinians nothing? Where should the Palestinians go who live in the by Isreal occupied territories that were promised to them? This constant back and forth struggle between Israel and the Palestinians, especially the Israeli attacks on Gaza, have the goal to make whole Palestine an Israeli state.
Even on the Israeli side there are a lot of voices who think that the Palestinians have a right to their own state and admit that bringing this problem to a solution (2-state) will solve a lot of problems, as it constitutes the root problem in the Middle East.
It is all about justice and fairness!
You are wrong: Obama is not against Israel,
he is for a 2-state solution: The Westbank and Gaza for the Palestinians, ALL the rest for Israel. I think that the Palestinians have a right to a 'small' part of Palestine, as they were the first to be in the Holy Land and there were several agreements under previous US administrations, also Bush's, that implemented this right.
Why should Israel have it all and the Palestinians nothing? Where should the Palestinians go who live in the by Isreal occupied territories that were promised to them? This constant back and forth struggle between Israel and the Palestinians, especially the Israeli attacks on Gaza, have the goal to make whole Palestine an Israeli state.
Even on the Israeli side there are a lot of voices who think that the Palestinians have a right to their own state and admit that bringing this problem to a solution (2-state) will solve a lot of problems, as it constitutes the root problem in the Middle East.
It is all about justice and fairness!
But it was during the1848 Israel/Arab war
that Israel was created, sending millions of Palestinians refugees out of Palestine into neighboring Arab countries and occupying Palestine.
But it was during the1948 Israel/Arab war
that Israel was created, sending millions of Palestinians refugees out of Palestine into neighboring Arab countries and occupying Palestine.
I think if Israel slings anything at Iran....
it would not just be rockets, and if someone had said I had no right to exist, I might consider slinging some rockets at them myself. I'm just sayin.
And as to Obama being able to hold them back...if he can't be bothered to shake his finger at Iran for crushing protests on worldwide TV, what on earth would make you think he could or would if he could hold Israel back? I have seen nothing to indicate that Barack Obama cares a hoot in heck what happens to Israel. If you look at his connections and who he has loaded his administration with...their agenda is certainly not pro Israel and to be frank I believe they consider Israel expendable, and if the palestinians get taken out as collateral damage...well...you should watch that posted video, and then you should look at a list of the Bilderberg group. Funny how the left always wanted to talk about it because there were many of right in the group...well, there are certainly a lot more of the left in it, and a ton of those are in the present administration. But now that they are in power, amazing how the Bilderberg group is no longer the big bad...sorry for borrowing your moniker there. lol.
Israel felt pulling out of Gaza was okay. sm
Oh, okay, that explains all those wailing Jews being forcefully removed from their homes of 30 plus years. Glad you cleared that up. Your statement is ridiculous. But then, they all are. Gosh, your lying comment is getting really old. Does anyone else think so?
A Christian is not allowed to comment on Israel? nm
Have we made new rules? I didn't know that! When did that happen! By the way, sm is exactly right. Ariel Sharon has made a mistake that will doom Israel. This is a man who wept on television with fury when saying he would never give up an inch of land and then handed the Gaza strip away. If you have been following this story for some time, decades, as I have, then you know what a tragedy this is. One does not have to be Jewish to understand it. In fact, if you understand the Biblical significance, you get the picture. And, of course, Sharon was wrong, as Hamas now wants Jerusalem.
I see, any criticism of Israel gets the label of antisemite.nm
z
And Israel loves those suicide bombers.
Your posts are disquieting. Why do you defend Hezbollah?
How he handled the Israel-Palestinian thing....
underscores his lack of experience. Putting up political posters at the Western Wall was not the smartest of moves either. Not saying he had personal knowledge of it, but he needs to rein in his "camp." A few days ago one of them, during a briefing on the plane, said something about "I've been in the White House for..." and a reporter had to remind him Obama was not President yet. Ahem.
As to the Berlin speech...a bit concerning. Is he running for President of the World or President of the United States? I think he needs to decide.
I assumed you meant Israel and Iran.
Iran's potential for nuclear weapons? A war between them is not likely, unless Israel initiates a Bush-style "premptive strike." Given their history of aggressive militarism, this is not entirely inconceivable. Ask yourself a few questions. When was the last time in modern history that Iran declared war or invaded another country, keeping in mind that Iraq invade Iran, not the other way around? Now, when was the last time Israel declared war and/or invaded another country, i.e., Syria, Egypt, Lebanon multiple times?
Despite Ahmadinejad's bellicose rhetoric, thanks to the US taxpayers, he can never hope to catch up with the nuclear arsenals now housed in Israel....and he knows that. Consider the case of Korea. Bush bullied North Korea around relentlessly UNTIL they succeeded in developing nukes. After that, W sure did start singing a different tune, didn't he? Stunning reversal in attitude.
As long as US nuclear policy is "do as I say, not as I do" and continues to bankroll nuclear stockpile arsenals in their Middle East military staging base, the region will remain unstable....just the way the US likes it, at least so far. A nuclear weapon in the hands of Iran just MIGHT bring about the same sort of results it did in Korea and serve as a moderating force. This is where diplomacy comes into play. Open discussions held in good faith (so far not possible in view of sanctions and all those Israeli NUKES) that encourage nuclear energy and discourage nuclear weaponry in Iran along with incentives (such as easing sanctions, for starters) would go a long way in at least bringing some HOPE for stability in the region. War there is not a foregone conclusion...unless we elect another saber-rattler.
Oh, I think Iran calling for the obliteration of Israel...
from the map, to me, gives them a right to be be concerned, doncha think? Oh my all means, given Iran a nuke and see how that stabilizes everything. Even Obama is not goofy enough to say that...HE said a nuke in the hands of Iran was unacceptable. Now whether that means Ahmadinejad would not be welcome for tea...not altogether sure.
Israel's just as bad as the rest of the scummy middle
marks the location of current message within thread
