The Obvious? The title - "Israel Can't Bomb Its Way To Peace".
My guess, Ms. Brooks, is you won't find anyone in Israel who disagrees with that. However, just as obvious, but completely unsaid is "Hamas Can't Rocket Its Way To Peace" either. And before the first Israeli bomb found its mark, hundreds, if not thousands of Hamas's rockets had been fired into Israel.
Sometimes a bombing run has absolutely nothing to do with seeking peace. It has to do with destroying a threat.
In a strictly military sense, Israel will "win" this battle against Hamas. For all its threats and bravado, Hamas is weak, and its weapons — terrorism, homemade rockets — are the weapons of the weak. Since 2001, Hamas has fired thousands of unguided Kassam rockets at Israel, but the rockets have killed only a handful of Israelis.
We are further treated to the predictable cynical "cause" for this attempt to take out Hamas - Israeli politics:
The Israeli assault may even strengthen Hamas in the longer run and weaken its more moderate secular rival, Fatah. As Israel should know by now (as we all should know), dropping bombs in densely populated areas is a surefire way to radicalize civilians and get them to rally around the home team, however flawed.
Ironically, it's precisely this psychological phenomenon that Olmert, Barak and Livni are counting on among Israelis, but they seem to assume it doesn't exist among Palestinians. (Or, worse, they're too cynical to care, as long as they profit politically.)
Speaking of the predictable, I'm sure by now you've figured out who is to blame for this, haven't you?
It's time for the United States to wake up from its long slumber and reengage — forcefully — with the Middle East peace process ... In January 2001, the Taba talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority came achingly close to a final settlement, but talks broke down after Likud's Ariel Sharon was elected prime minister on Feb. 6, 2001. Sharon refused to meet with Yasser Arafat, and newly inaugurated President George W. Bush had no interest in pushing Israel toward peace.
And that, dear reader, is why Hamas rockets are raining down on Israel and Israel is attacking Hamas. No mention of Arafat turning down a 98% solution when he had the chance, is there? Certainly no mention of the fact that Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza leaving it to the Palestinians to rule.
Last, Ms. Brooks also fails to mention that Hamas, a terrorist group, constitutes the governing body in Gaza and has this to say about any "peace process" in its charter:
Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement [Hamas]. Abusing any part of Palestine is abuse directed against part of religion. Nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement [Hamas] is part of its religion. Its members have been fed on that. For the sake of hoisting the banner of Allah over their homeland they fight. (Article 13)
Sounds like a group who would gladly negotiate "peace", doesn't it?
Additionally the PA and Abbas put the onus squarely where it belongs and condemn Hamas as instigator of the violence and the roadblock to peace - not Israel - something else Ms. Brooks seems to have missed.
I stand in awe, sometimes, at the audacity of those on the left who find the ability, in any situation, to excuse the terrorist and blame those defending themselves. And as formulaic, predictable and cynical as their arguments may be, they also seem to always find someone to publish their apologist rubbish.
Seriously, these folks have one historical lesson and it runs in continuous loop: Vietnam.
There are plenty of examples of these kinds of situations, where one side (or the other) has won via military force or a combination thereof. (Kyle makes the obvious extreme example.)
Just today we see the Sri Lankan government claiming it has overrun the Tamil Tiger "capital." That has been a festering war for decades, and yet, somehow, the government forces are making serious gains. How can that be? I thought cycles of violence went on and on?
In fact, because Hamas only controls Gaza, the one location where the Israelis unilaterally pulled out, abandoning settlements, make this even hysterical. This cycle will end when Hamas is removed and the Fatah wing retakes control.
The unspeakable part about all of this is that this drivel comes from the Left. You always hear conservatives defend Israel on tv or in the papers.
And what do Jews do in the US? Do they vote those who back them, support them, side with them?
No! They vote with the Left, which castigates them, laughs at them, calls them war criminals, and hails the evil deeds of those who want to kill Jews.
My own relations in Florida told me (with such pride, like a man and his first child) how they "voted for an African-American" for President. I asked them: What if he listens to the Left and sides with the Palestinians against Israel, unlike George W. Bush? That’ll never happen, they told me. Obama is pure, because his middle name is Hussein. He loves the Jews, they told me (with I believe a straight face). He would never harm them.
Now refer, in the history books, to 1933, and Hitler, Adolf.
Hamas’s rockets are home-made and little more than glorified bottle rockets. Whereas the Israeli government has killed hundreds of Palestinians since December 27, 2008. The civilian Palestinian causalty figures from the United Nation that one sees reported only count women and children as being civilians. Yet only four Israelis have been killed since that time from Hamas’s rockets.
Since June 2007, the Israeli government has been conducting siege warfare against the Gaza Strip, including blocking food, fuel and medicine. That’s nothing less than a pogrom of genocide being conducted against the Palestinians. Those who criticize Palestinians for fighting back apparently expect them to curl up in an inconspicuous corner and die.
Additionally, often times, such as in the above article, the concern about Palestinian attacks on Israelis demonstrates an extreme anti-rational bias and a disconcern for innocent Palestinians killed by Israelis. The Israelis kill far more Palestinians than Palestinians kill Israelis, including of children and women. So the concern in such instances isn’t over the loss of innocent life, but it does demonstrate a disconcern for innocent Palestinians killed by Israelis.
On other ethical grounds as well, this is the Palestinians’ actual homeland, whereas most of the Jews in Israel are Europeans or of recent European descent. With military might the Palestinians were forced out of their homes and off of their lands so that they could be given to white Europeans, all based upon the racialist theocratic doctrine that the land of Palestine belongs to them because of promises the tribal god Yahweh had supposedly made to their ancestors. Of which, as a number of the Orthodox Jews point out, isn’t a correct doctrine even on its own invalid terms, since the ancient Israelites had violated their covenant with Yahweh which was a condition for them keeping their land in Israel. (And as the Old Testament records, the land of Israel was originally taken via force by the Hebrews, in acts of massive genocidal overkill, methodically and deliberately slaughtering even the babies of the original inhabitants.)
If U.S. citizens would apply the same ethical standard to the land Palestine as they commonly do to their own land, then one would be forced to conclude that killing of said Europeans occupying Palestinian lands is justified as an act of self-defense in protection of home, property and their own lives, of which right U.S. citizens often regard a sacred above all others: and rightly so, because if one doesn’t have the right to use leathal force in order to defend one’s property, then one in fact has no rights whatsoever (for the reason that any such "rights" are empty verbiage if one doesn’t have the right to enforce claim to them).
Even the Sephardi and Mizrahi Jews in Israel are second-class citizens. There is the case of the 100,000-plus so-called "ringworm children," who were Sephardi and Mizrahi children that, during the 1950s, the Israeli government irradiated with 35,000 times the maximum safe life-exposure dose of X-rays through their skulls. The U.S. government paid the Israeli government today’s equivalent of 50 billion U.S. dollars to conduct these radiation experiments, even though the ill effects of massive doses of X-rays were well-known since the 1920s, and even though the actual radiation experiments only cost about a million dollars (in other words, the rest of the money was simply a payoff to the Israeli government by the U.S. government for it conducting these radiation tests). The Israeli government called them "ringworm children" as a pretext to massively irradiate their skulls, whether or not they had ringworm. Many of the children died within a few days of the radiation exposure, with a large number of the rest being left with brain-damage and/or cancers.
Israel is a socialist basket case that would quickly collapse if it weren’t for the hapless U.S. taxpayers being forced to prop it up. It ought to be allowed to collapse, and then the white Europeans there can go back to Europe, or move to the U.S., where they’d be more productive anyway, instead of draining their efforts down a socialist black hole. Israel is a maniacal Rube Goldberg contraption: beyond the ethical atrocity that it is, it’s an asssult against reason itself.
Regarding Bush, as with Obama, he’s just a puppet of the permanent government of the so-called military-industrial complex that President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned us about in his January 17, 1961 presidential farewell address. The U.S. presidency is little more than a figurehead position. As President Franklin D. Roosevelt noted in a private letter only published after his death:
"" The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the Government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson—and I am not wholly excepting the Administration of W.W. The country is going through a repetition of Jackson’s fight with the Bank of the United States—only on a far bigger and broader basis. ""
(From President Franklin Delano Roosevelt in a letter to Col. Edward Mandell House, November 21, 1933; contained in F.D.R.: His Personal Letters, 1928-1945, edited by Elliott Roosevelt [New York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce, 1950], pg. 373.)
The Grad-model Katyusha rockets that were fired into Beersheba on Wednesday were manufactured in China and smuggled into Gaza after the Sinai border wall was blown up by Hamas in January, defense officials said.
Hi, McQ. For being allegedly industrially manufactured military-grade weapons, they sure don’t kill many people or cause much damage (as the picture in the article you cited shows). I have pictures saved on my hard drive of the type of rockets the Palestenians are using. These things were made in someone’s garage.
But my intent wasn’t to get into an argument over irrelevant minutia, which is a tactic you are using, and which is a tactic people who are in the wrong use. Nothing about the points I made in my above post are contingent on the rockets being made in China, or in Timbuktu for that matter.
And to shark, you’re also missing the point. A person can be killed with a B.B. gun. The point of my first paragraph in my previous post was that the Israeli government is killing far more Palestinians than Palestinians are killing Israelis, particularly of noncombatant civilians. But, oh, that’s right, it only matters when white European Jews are killed.
In a world where people have been intensively conditioned into epistemological relativism, attempting to talk past people’s conditioning is a nearly impossible task. So enjoy living in the mental phantasy world you have allowed the government to construct for you as it continues to take everything away from you. Enjoy your and your friends and family’s future crushing poverty and death, brought to you courtesy of your ever-loving government.
For being allegedly industrially manufactured military-grade weapons, they sure don’t kill many people or cause much damage
If I’m shooting at you with a crappy .22 that only fires straight in the sense that I’m not hitting things standing behind me, Would you not care, because it’s a crappy gun and pathetic ammunition I’m using, or would you be upset that I was shooting at you?
he point of my first paragraph in my previous post was that the Israeli government is killing far more Palestinians than Palestinians are killing Israelis
Being bad at killing people is not a valid defense when your intent and desire is to kill everyone.
Hamas isn’t launching these things out of kindness. They INTEND and HOPE to kill as many Israelis as possible. That they aren’t very good at it doesn’t mean anything other than Israel should bump off the people pushing the Fire button before they get better at it.
So enjoy living in the mental phantasy world you have allowed the government to construct for you as it continues to take everything away from you.
Two things. First, you have been watching too many Disney movies lately. Second, I have yet to actually be given a list of all these things my Government has taken from me. Perhaps you will be the one to finally produce a list. If you can’t actually list things, then you haven’t lost anything, have you.
Enjoy your and your friends and family’s future crushing poverty and death, brought to you courtesy of your ever-loving government.
Well, yes. We are preparing for the crushing poverty. The irony is that you helped put the reason in office, while we did what we could to at least get someone who would steal from us less. In theory.
As for that death thing? Well, we’re the ones with the guns, so we can fight back. If that time finally comes, you’re welcome to swing by my place so I can do your job for you.
"The point of my first paragraph in my previous post was that the Israeli government is killing far more Palestinians than Palestinians are killing Israelis, particularly of noncombatant civilians" So what? In WWII, the Allies killed far more German and Japanese civilians than the Germans killed Europeans and Africans and the Japanese killed Chinese, Koreans, Indonesians, etc... But the German people elected Adolf you say? Well the Palestinians elected Hamas. Hamas started this fight and hides among civilians.
Hi, McQ. For being allegedly industrially manufactured military-grade weapons, they sure don’t kill many people or cause much damage (as the picture in the article you cited shows).
That may have more to do with the operator than the weapon. Anyone who is familiar with the lethality of Katyusha type rockets would never be silly enough to liken them to "bottle rockets" and expect to be taken seriously.
A known anti-Semite. My same relations kissed the ground he walked on. My grandfather voted for that pr!ck four times. And when the American Jewish Committee went to the White House to beg Roosevelt to bomb the railways into the death camps, he refused to see them - instead, he sent out an aide (a real sign of respect for the idiots who supported you) who said, "These are the kind of Jews you should be associated with."
Remember also that Roosevelt refused to allow admittance to Miami the Jewish refugees from the SS St. Louis, who had to go back to Europe, where most of them ended up in the ovens.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt - a damn Jew hater. If I ever hear a fellow Jew mention his name with reverence again I will spit in their face.
Anyone who blathers on about how the rockets are ineffective, so give the Palestinians a break, or other such mush-headed nonsense, has missed the most important aspect of the conflict.
If the Palestinians decided today that they were ready for peace and laid down their weapons, there would be peace.
If the Israelis laid down their weapons today, Israel would not exist in a week.
That’s the simple reality. Holding Israel to some weird standard of Palestinian civilians killed, when they don’t want this conflict in the first place, and are avoiding the targeting of civilians when feasible, is the thinking of a moral infant. Failing to hold the Hamas responsible, when their very charter calls for the destruction of Israel and they follow that charter by killing Israelis every time they get the chance, and they intentionlly expose their own civilians to Israeli retaliation by firing weapons from civilian areas, is in the same category.
Israel pulled out of Gaza on the advice of such morally confused fools, and were told that such an action would be "productive", and would move the peace process forward. It didn’t. Hamas decided it was a sign of weakness, and they moved right in and opened a new front in their aggression on Israel.
Blathering about epistomology doesn’t change these simple truths. Israel is in an existential struggle. Expecting them to make things easy for the enemy that is trying to destroy them is preposterous and morally indefensible.
If someone started throwing home made rockets at your home would you try to stop them? Yes or no? ANd if the answer is yes and they state repeatedly and without waivering that their only desire is to kill you than how would you deal with them? Please enlighten us.
———- As for the article’s author’s babble.
I have stated before and I state again.
The only way the US will end this conflict is 1 of 2 ways.
a. stop supporting Israel, in which case it wont be long until we see nukes go off as Israel’s enemies continue to attack her.
b. Put an army division in Gaza and shoot anyone carrying a weapon.
If the US (or shall I say Obama) doesnt do one of the 2 things above then we will continue to do pretty much what we have done for the past 30 years or so.
The only 2 that can end this is Israel by a. Giving up and slitting their own throats or b. Totally decimating Hamas. or Hamas by a. giving up their own stated purpose of destroying Israel and trying to live peacefully with Israel or b. slitting their own throats or dying under Israeli firepower.
Hi, folks. A few of you have responded to me, but what I’m saying to you has gone right over your head.
Of course it has, James - that’s what always happens when well crafted and well argued comments are posted here.
Now go deflate your ego and undertand that what you threw out here was received exactly as it should have been - blithering nonsense.
So enjoy living in the mental phantasy world you have allowed the government to construct for you as it continues to take everything away from you. Enjoy your and your friends and family’s future crushing poverty and death, brought to you courtesy of your ever-loving government.
And the same to you, oh keeper of the flame of Western civilization. We’ve never spoken up against the government here - no sir, not us, nope, we loves the gubmint.
Hi, McQ. I’ve noticed that this website is a fact-free zone, or at least it tries to be. The reason I didn’t bother providing links within my first post within this thread is because I like to test the waters of new websites that I post on. It may come as an utter shock to you, but some websites won’t accept posts that are thoroughly referenced with links to major media news articles or government documentation.
It turns out that this website is one of those, so that wouldn’t be a shock to you after all.
I’ve noticed that this website is a fact-free zone, or at least it tries to be.
Clever comeback James. Right up there with "oh, yeah, well I’m rubber ..." etc.
But hey, if that’s your final word, there’s no reason for you to stop by anymore, is there?
The reason I didn’t bother providing links within my first post within this thread is because I like to test the waters of new websites that I post on.
Oooh, it was a test! Shucks, we flunked?
It may come as an utter shock to you, but some websites won’t accept posts that are thoroughly referenced with links to major media news articles or government documentation.
It turns out that this website is one of those, so that wouldn’t be a shock to you after all.
Oh, see, now you’ve flunked. This blog’s comment section has a little button on the far right above the comment window (you know, HTML tools?) which allows you to put a link or multiple links right in your post.
Unsurprisingly, you don’t know that. Humorous, no?
"" Then you’re a duffus James, and I just can’t help you with that. ""
Interesting how the settings (or programming) of your website gets construed in your debased mind as me being "a duffus." Apparently you are unaware of what "plain text" means, and the implications that has to your position. But of course, for you to realize how jejunely crassid that is would require you to have an intelligence above your current status, which is a counterfactual, and hence no use to us here.
Interesting how the settings (or programming) of your website gets construed in your debased mind as me being "a duffus." Apparently you are unaware of what "plain text" means, and the implications that has to your position.
Apparently you aren’t bright enough to read the notice posted above the comment box and figure out what implication that may carry for posting your precious "plain text" are you? The notice is in English and everything!
Where I come from, that sort of a deficiency is certainly considered to be characteristic of a "duffus".
But of course, for you to realize how jejunely crassid that is would require you to have an intelligence above your current status, which is a counterfactual, and hence no use to us here.
Oh my wounded soul ... so predictable.
It always has amused me when someone beams in, proves himself to be a goof, is apprised of that fact and then feels the necessity to hit the thesaurus in an attempt to prove - through the use of obscure words, non-words and unintelligible phrases - that he’s something other than he is. It is especially amusing when he fumbles the attempt as badly as you just did.
Heh, thanks for the chuckle, but no sale, Jimbo. The fact (yes, it’s obviously a fact) that a man of your supposed intellect can’t read simple instructions and figure out how to post a comment in the way he wishes - something lesser people here have consistently mastered quickly - obviously says more about your mental acuity or lack thereof, than something as transparent as thesaurus diving.
Oh, and I assume I should take your cackle-worthy paragraph to be a "no" as it pertains to my offer, correct?