Shin bet to (Ex) pres. Jimmy Carter "Drop Dead!"

[FinnAgain]

Okay, so you’ve suspended the “attack the post, not the poster” rule again.

[Sophistry_and_Illusion]

@tomndebb

Sophistry and Illusion, if feel someone has violated a rule, report the post.

Do not resort to deliberate insults in GD.

Sorry; I let my temper get the best of me.

[treis]

@John Mace

Yes, I think it’s reasonable for the Palestinians to demand a stop to the settlements as a condition of negotiations. And I think the US should make that a condition of any future aid.

Just for the record, I have a lot of problems with Israel and the way the US seemingly supports them no matter what. But I also recognize that they are in an real existential fight (as oppose to the fake one the Republicans keep telling us we’re in).

Real existential threat?

I don’t really see how Israel has a real existential threat if you discount the threat against the U.S. Since 1920, 3,740 Israeli citizens have died from Palestinian terror attacks cite 1 cite 2. We lost a shade under 3000 in the 9/11 attacks, and dozens more in various other embassy bombings. I don’t know if the Israeli number I cited include military personal or not, but if they did you can add another couple hundred to America’s tally. Regardless of how you calculate the numbers, the point is that the deaths from terrorist attacks are comparable between America and Israel, and essentially equal over the last 30 years. I don’t see how that can constitute an existential threat for one country, but not the other.

Israel does face a higher possibility of invasion from it’s neighbors, but even this threat is difficult to take seriously. In a conventional military fight, Israel would (and has) wipe the floor with all of it’s neighbors. However, the possibility of Egypt or Jordan participating in an invasion of Israel is only slightly higher than the chance of Mexico and Canada tag teaming the United States. Syria is much more hostile, but again, their prospects of winning a war against Israel is zero.

What % would you put on Israel existing in 50, 100, and 200 years?

[Jinx]

When posting this thread, it appears the OP forgot (or, rather ignored) all of Jimmy Carter’s statements in recent years.

[Captain_Amazing]

@treis

Real existential threat?

I don’t really see how Israel has a real existential threat if you discount the threat against the U.S. Since 1920, 3,740 Israeli citizens have died from Palestinian terror attacks cite 1 cite 2. We lost a shade under 3000 in the 9/11 attacks, and dozens more in various other embassy bombings.

Remember, first off, that the US has a population of 300 million compared to Israel’s 7 million.

Also, while al Qaeda might want to dstroy the US, that’s not really their primary goal, and they’re not very strong nearby us. There isn’t a large al Qaeda presence in the US, Canada, or Mexico, for instance…if they want to attack us, they have to first get here from overseas. The Palestinian terrorist groups, on the other hand, have the destruction of Israel as one of their primary goals, and they’re right next to Israel.

Also, since its founding 60 years ago, Israel has fought 4 wars with its neighbors in which their goal was to destroy Israel. Even though it’s unlikey that an invasion by one of their neighbors now would succeed, their past experiences make Israel wary of taking actions that might compromise their security.

[treis]

@Captain Amazing

Remember, first off, that the US has a population of 300 million compared to Israel’s 7 million.

Sure, but it’s not like the Israeli people are going to die off from terrorist attacks. The CDC only lists the top 20 causes of death. Americans die from the 20th cause, HIV, at a rate twice that of Israeli deaths from terrorist attacks in the 00s. Just to throw out another example, Americans die from Drunk Driving accidents at a rate a bit above twice the Israeli death rate from terrorists, but no one suggests we face an existential threat from Drunk Drivers.

@Captain Amazing

Also, while al Qaeda might want to dstroy the US, that’s not really their primary goal, and they’re not very strong nearby us. There isn’t a large al Qaeda presence in the US, Canada, or Mexico, for instance…if they want to attack us, they have to first get here from overseas. The Palestinian terrorist groups, on the other hand, have the destruction of Israel as one of their primary goals, and they’re right next to Israel.

Also, since its founding 60 years ago, Israel has fought 4 wars with its neighbors in which their goal was to destroy Israel. Even though it’s unlikey that an invasion by one of their neighbors now would succeed, their past experiences make Israel wary of taking actions that might compromise their security.

Yeah, there are plenty of organizations that want to destroy Israel as a country, but there are plenty that want to do the same to America (including Al Qaeda). However, if they have no remotely feasible way of accomplishing their goal, they can’t be said to be an existential threat.

[Mr.Moto]

@treis

Yeah, there are plenty of organizations that want to destroy Israel as a country, but there are plenty that want to do the same to America (including Al Qaeda). However, if they have no remotely feasible way of accomplishing their goal, they can’t be said to be an existential threat.

Keep in mind that these organizations include Syria and Iran.

[treis]

@Mr. Moto

Keep in mind that these organizations include Syria and Iran.

As noted before, Syria is not an existential threat to Israel. The chance of Syria ending Israels existence is practically zero.

Israel has no reason to fear a conventional attack from Iran. Iran would have to cross Turkey and/or Iraq, and then cross Lebanon, Syria, and/or Jordan. That’s simply not possible. Yeah, they can supply Hamas and Hezbollah with rockets but, as noted, the rocket attacks (and other terrorist activities) don’t threaten the existence of Israel. Israel does have to fear an unconventional, i.e. nuclear, from Iran, but so does America. I see that as a separate issue from the Palestinian threat which spawned this line of debate.

[Weirddave]

@treis

Israel does have to fear an unconventional, i.e. nuclear, from Iran, but so does America. I see that as a separate issue from the Palestinian threat which spawned this line of debate.

Why? If Israel faces a threat to it’s very existence, and one of their opponents comes to posses weapons that greatly facilitate that threat, why is that a completely separate issue? Sure Iran would have to cross a lot of territory to attack Israel conventionally, but what if they could achieve the same results by supplying clients with horrific weapons while at the same time retaining some degree of deniability that they were responsible?

[Alessan]

@treis

Israel does have to fear an unconventional, i.e. nuclear, from Iran, but so does America.

I’m sorry, but that’s not really comparble. A small-scale nuclear attack on America, while horrible, is something the country can survive. Not so with Israel. This country is so small and so densely poplulated, that a single nuclear warhead detonating in the Tel Aviv are could kill one third of our entire population and 75% of our economy, in essence destroying the country.

Sure, Israel could respond with a devestating nuclear attack of its own, but so what? That wouldn’t bring the country back to life; and I’m not sure it has that much deterrance value, either. Iran is a much larger country than Israel, and Iranian leaders may decide that having millions of their citizens die is a worthwhile price to pay to finally rid the world of the Little Satan.

[tomndebb]

@FinnAgain

Okay, so you’ve suspended the “attack the post, not the poster” rule again.

I’ve done no such thing.

I gave direct orders to stop to the persons who made personal attacks and I gave a suggestion of ways to improve the discourse to the person who simply got too emotional.

[ /Modding ]

[Malthus]

Getting back to an earlier point - Carter’s religious motivations, and their relation with his attitude to Israel - I found this recent article, which is somewhat disturbing:

Torah And Terror: A Tale Of A Resilient Nation

And yet these CD’s, published by Simon and Schuster in 2007 based on lessons Carter delivered in 1998, 2001 and 2003, feature a disturbing number of subtle and not so subtle anti-Jewish and anti-Israel statements – plus a fair dose of falsehood and ignorance.

  In a typical example, Carter says, “Korban was a prayer that could be performed by usually a man in an endorsed ceremony by the Pharisees that you could say in effect, ‘God, everything that I own – all these sheep, all these goats, this nice house and the money that I have – I dedicate to You, to God.’ And from then on according to the Pharisees’ law, those riches didn’t belong to that person anymore…. 

  “So with impunity, and approved by the Pharisaic law, they could avoid taking care of their needy parents by a trick that had been evolved by the incorrect and improper interpretation of the law primarily designed by religious leaders to benefit whom? The rich folks. The powerful people.”

  During another Bible lesson Carter (with a responsive audience) discussed the Jewish attitude toward non-Jews. “[‘Uncircumcised’] was an epithet, a highly discriminatory phrase… How would you characterize from a Jew’s point of view the uncircumcised? Non-believer. And what? Unclean. What? They called them dogs, that’s true.”

…

In his analysis of the CD’s, Miller found that at times Carter actually conflates ancient and modern Jewish history by mistakenly calling Israelites Israelis or Judea Israel. In one example, Carter says, “God would save the Israelites, they would sign a firm commitment or contract or covenant. The Israelis would what? Violate the covenant, break their promises to God. They would be punished.”

  And when Carter mentions real Israelis on these CD’s, his treatment is no kinder. During one lesson recorded in December 2001, Carter recalls being “distressed…in October when the Israelis invaded Bethlehem [in response to the outbreak of the Second Intifada]. They set up a military installation on a hill overlooking the square right by the place where Jesus was born and there was a young man named Johnny Thaokieh … who had lived and worked in the Bethlehem cathedral and helped care for the place where Christ was born and he was out in the square playing with his four year old nephew and the Israelis’ sniper shot and killed him in the square … and Bethlehem is gone back into mourning not only commemorating Christ’s birth but also the assassination of this young fellow Johnny” [emphasis added].

  In another mention of Israel, Carter describes former Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin as a terrorist from Poland who formed the terrorist group Irgun – he did not – and later headed the Herut Party, which Carter mistakenly translates as “Peace Party.” He then recalls the signing of the Camp David Accords, which launched a peace between Jews and Arabs, which he says lasted 15 years after he left office. The peace broke down partially because “the Palestinians’ land is now almost completely colonized by the Israeli settlements. They have built settlements all over the West Bank and Gaza.”

  “You know,” said CAMERA’s Van Zile, “when I listen to these discs and when I read his book [Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid] I’ve come to the conclusion that he doesn’t really like Jews very much. And it’s a serious charge to level but clearly what has happened is that he’s invested a lot in the notion that somehow there’s something congenitally wrong with the Jewish people and there are times when it looks like it’s based on his reading of Scripture.”

I can’t comment, as I’ve not actually heard the CDs in question. Does anyone know more?

[DSeid]

But ya didn’t blow your whistle man!

Honestly Tom with all the (unfortunately necessary) disciplining of our childish antics that you have to do, do you ever get to actually participate much any more? And you don’t even get paid for this?

As to the issue of an existential threat -

Israel is small enough that a dirty bomb - something not outside of possibility for a terrorist group to get a hold of and into the country - well placed - could cause enough death and enough economic havoc as to pose an existential threat to the country as a whole, even if the current death rate from terror is not high.

OTOH, terror does pose what could be phrased as an existentialist threat to Israel. And such is among its goals. The threat of terror causes more fear and trepidation than the actual damage usually does. It leverages itself and by so doing changes the nature of the character of a country, the meaning that the country gives to its own very existence.

[Mr.Moto]

@treis

As noted before, Syria is not an existential threat to Israel. The chance of Syria ending Israels existence is practically zero.

Did you miss this?

[FinnAgain]

Or, of course, that after bombing the site, the Syrians were totally quiet. No calls for revenge, no attempt to stir up an international outcry… they slunk away with their tails between their legs. That, to a lot of folks, was the most damning evidence of all.

[Spoke]

You know, Malthus, I could cite various quotes by you about Christians in this thread, point out theological and factual errors I believe you are making, take it all out of context, and make it sound as though you don’t really like Christians very much.

shrug

[Malthus]

@spoke-

You know, Malthus, I could cite various quotes by you about Christians in this thread, point out theological and factual errors I believe you are making, take it all out of context, and make it sound as though you don’t really like Christians very much.

shrug

Really? What bad stuff have I said about Christians in this thread?

In any event, I’m asking those who may have heard the tapes for the context. As I said, I haven’t actually heard the tapes in question, so I’m not basing my (previously made) judgment of Carter’s motives on the tapes. All I know of them is at second hand, from this article.

The tapes are publicly available and I assume that if these were “quotes out of context” someone will know it.

If true, the attitude displayed certainly adds evidentiary weight as corroborative evidence for my stated theory concerning Carter’s (religious) motivations - for all but those willing to shrug off any evidence, that is.

[Spoke]

@Malthus

Really? What bad stuff have I said about Christians in this thread?

Nothing worse than what Carter has said about Jews in the out-of-context quotes you have cited. Which is to say, nothing, really.

Which is my point.

[Malthus]

@spoke-

Nothing worse than what Carter has said about Jews in the out-of-context quotes you have cited. Which is to say, nothing, really.

Which is my point.

I guess you have no problems with someone saying "How would you characterize from a Christian’s point of view non-Christians? Non-believer. And what? Unclean. What? They called them dogs, that’s true.” :smack:

Or the setting up the scene of peaceful Palestinian children being deliberately “assasinated” by Israeli snipers, and connecting that to the Bethlehem-Jesus story?

The fact that it is incorrect and displays an awesome ignorance and willingness to buy into historical Christian anti-Jewish canards isn’t the point (though that is bad enough).

The whole point is that Carter is seemingly unable to seperate out “Israel”, the modern country, with the “Judea” of the past and the lessons he’s absorbed from scripture. He makes absolutely no bones about it - see the quote above, to Golda, which figures prominently in his new book.

Why is this a big shocking surprise? pro-Zionist evangelicals make the very same mistake! And they are far more common than Carter-type anti-Zionist evangelicals.

[Shodan]

I’m not quite sure, but if this is what you are asking for -

In a typical example, Carter says, “Korban was a prayer that could be performed by usually a man in an endorsed ceremony by the Pharisees that you could say in effect, ‘God, everything that I own – all these sheep, all these goats, this nice house and the money that I have – I dedicate to You, to God.’ And from then on according to the Pharisees’ law, those riches didn’t belong to that person anymore….

This is a reference to Mark 7:10-12. Jesus seemed to be condemning what He considered an abuse of Korban

During another Bible lesson Carter (with a responsive audience) discussed the Jewish attitude toward non-Jews. “[‘Uncircumcised’] was an epithet, a highly discriminatory phrase… How would you characterize from a Jew’s point of view the uncircumcised? Non-believer. And what? Unclean. What? They called them dogs, that’s true.”

Again, this is expressive of much of what is found in the Bible. Whether or not Carter believes that this is characteristic of Jews in general, I couldn’t say, but there is a certain amount of “looking down on the unwashed” in the Bible. And Jesus Himself refers to a Samaritan woman (cite) as a dog. (Samaritans were outcasts in Jesus’ day, since they were not considered "real’ Jews.)

In his analysis of the CD’s, Miller found that at times Carter actually conflates ancient and modern Jewish history by mistakenly calling Israelites Israelis or Judea Israel. In one example, Carter says, “God would save the Israelites, they would sign a firm commitment or contract or covenant. The Israelis would what? Violate the covenant, break their promises to God. They would be punished.”

This I couldn’t comment on, as I don’t see how it is anti-Semitic. Carter is assuming continuity between ancient and modern Israel, and there is tons of this kind of thing in Second Kings and elsewhere. Practically all the descriptions of the kings of Israel and Judah have a standard “He was a good king, except he did not tear down the high places or the sacred poles” or “he was a bad king, and so the Assyrians conquered Israel”. Same in the book of Judges ’ “they turned from the Lord, so He sent the Philistines (or whatever) to conquer them. Then they cried out to the Lord, and He sent Ehud” to kill Eglon the king.

It seems to be of a piece with what Carter said to Meir about the secular nature of Israel’s government. I don’t necessarily agree with the idea, but it is much like what is said in the Christian Old Testament.

And when Carter mentions real Israelis on these CD’s, his treatment is no kinder. During one lesson recorded in December 2001, Carter recalls being “distressed…in October when the Israelis invaded Bethlehem [in response to the outbreak of the Second Intifada]. They set up a military installation on a hill overlooking the square right by the place where Jesus was born and there was a young man named Johnny Thaokieh … who had lived and worked in the Bethlehem cathedral and helped care for the place where Christ was born and he was out in the square playing with his four year old nephew and the Israelis’ sniper shot and killed him in the square … and Bethlehem is gone back into mourning not only commemorating Christ’s birth but also the assassination of this young fellow Johnny” [emphasis added].

Couldn’t say - I never heard of Johnny Thaokieh, and Google reveals nothing.

In another mention of Israel, Carter describes former Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin as a terrorist from Poland who formed the terrorist group Irgun – he did not – and later headed the Herut Party, which Carter mistakenly translates as “Peace Party.” He then recalls the signing of the Camp David Accords, which launched a peace between Jews and Arabs, which he says lasted 15 years after he left office. The peace broke down partially because “the Palestinians’ land is now almost completely colonized by the Israeli settlements. They have built settlements all over the West Bank and Gaza.”

I think this is just more of Carter’s wishful thinking.

“You know,” said CAMERA’s Van Zile, “when I listen to these discs and when I read his book [Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid] I’ve come to the conclusion that he doesn’t really like Jews very much. And it’s a serious charge to level but clearly what has happened is that he’s invested a lot in the notion that somehow there’s something congenitally wrong with the Jewish people and there are times when it looks like it’s based on his reading of Scripture.”

This sounds accurate to me.

Regards,
Shodan