Absolutely correct. Just wanted someone who agreed with you (which I do) to nitpick before someone who didn’t.
They did. About six weeks ago, at a UN post in Lebanon. Along with a Chinese soldier, a Finnish one, and an Austrian one.
No need to imagine the headlines, you can read them. Or was that just some kind of cryptic whoosh?
In addition, the Egyptians demanded the withdrawal of the UN Peacekeeping troops just before the war - hardly the action of someone worried about invasion. I was a teenager then, and followed it quite closely - in fact I still have the NY Times issues from the war. Also, my father, who worked for the UN was supposed to go there in the late '50s until they figured out he was Jewish.
This actually has some bearing on the OP. By 1967 the Russians were supporting the Arabs, having moved away from their initial support of Israel, no doubt because Israel remained obstinately democratic and pro-US. A lot of left-wint (not liberal) groups, like the Socialist Workers party, the CP-USA, became anti-Israel, under orders, no doubt. I am not saying that anyone not supporting Israel today is a Commie stooge, but back then it was a factor.
I agree. Israel is part of the industrialized Western world, and to some on the far left of the political spectrum “West” = “bad.”
That was the point. When Israel accidentally kills people, it’s obviously “deliberate.” When anyone else makes a mistake, it’s understandable. Yet another double standard applied to Israel.
To some on the far right of the political spectrum, “fluoride” = “Commie plot.” But of course, that’s just a meaningless bit of idiot yammering wrt the present discussion.
I think it is a trifle foolish to believe all of this activity is down to Israel. For example, it is difficult to see how US intervention in Afganistan benefits Israel, and for that matter, “protecting energy supplies” makes a lot more sense than “protecting Israel” when looking at US intervention in Iraq.
However, leaving aside these factors (which IMHO make somewhat of nonsense of the notion the US is fighting “proxy wars for Israel” - the US cannot simultaneously be acting wholly selfishly in protecting its oil supply, as some on the Left claim, and be acting against its best interests in protecting Israel at the same time!), one may legitimately ask - why provide support for Israel? (Ignoring again that the US also supports Egypt, Jordan etc. in roughly the same manner and to roughly the same degree).
To me the answer appears obvious, and it is the same answer as is given to isolationism in other contexts: “we must hang together, or we shall hang seperately”. The menaces facing Israel are the same as those facing the US. If Islamic terrorism should triumph against Israel, terrorists will not proceed to ignore the US - they will be emboldened for further attacks on it. Therefore, it is simply sensible and self-intertested to support those who are on “our side”.
An Iran which possesses nuclear weapons will not just be a menace to Israel; they just may be a menace to the US as well. It is not only for the sake of Israel that one may question the consequences of such an acquisition!
While discussion of Israel as the “51st state” is not anti-semitic in any way, I do think it demonstrates a painful amount of naivete.
I pointed out to you in another recent thread how you’re way off track here, but as mhendo is also taking refuge in this silliness, it seems that a refresher course is needed.
There’s lots of criticism of Israel’s policies. I agree with some of it. Most of it cannot be linked to anti-Semitism, and few try. That doesn’t stop the frequent whining on this board and elsewhere about how “you can’t criticize Israel without being labeled an anti-Semite”.
Bullshit.
As I said in the aforementioned thread:
As I further explained to you, those who frame the Middle East debate in terms of stark Good and Evil (with Israel playing the latter role) and use classic stereotypes to further their agenda (“they dominate the media”) are far more likely to be bigots than the typical opponent of Israeli policies, and yes, when the extremists fulminate in that manner, they’re likely to be called on it.
False claims like “It bothers me that I cannot voice (concerns about our role vis-a-vis Israel) without being accused, directly or by innuendo, of anti-Semitism” play into the hands of bigots, and help stifle legitimate debate.
The claim is not false. I have seen it happen on these boards.
And what stifles legitimate debate is people being too timid to come forward with criticism of Israel, or US support for Israel, for fear thay may be labeled a bigot.
There is a name for the fallacy you are promoting-- poisoning the well.
(And yes, I recognize and regret the awkwardness of that metaphor in the context of this thread.)
I’m not so “simplistic” that I failed to understand that **Sam ** was referring to the attack on Lebanon just a few weeks ago.
(Oh, but thanks, Jackmannii, for condescending to “explain” to me why we should expect critics of Israel to be bigots.)
No refresher course is needed.
Not a single thing you posted in the other thread, or in this this one, disproves that some people draw a connection between opposition to Israel on the one hand, and anti-Semitism on the other, even when there is no connection.
I never said that everyone does it, nor that it happens all the time. But enough people do it, and do it often enough, that some of the mud that they throw tends to stick, even when it is completely unjustified.
Also, despite your disclaimer that you don’t believe that all opponents of Israeli policies are anti-Semites, your post gives the impression that, if those of us who are not anti-Semites suffer some guilt-by-association, then we only have ourselves to blame.
So kindly go fuck yourself.
Of course this is a ludicrous distortion of what I said, and your resorting to such a strawman is a good indicator of how invalid your claims are in this matter.
I believe Sam was responding to my nitipick about Israel actually attacking first in 1967. Nothing to do with Lebanon, unless you think Sam believes that Hezbollah offered a similar threat as the entire Egyptian army in 1967 (before we found out about their battle quality, that is.)
Yes, and I think our military adventures in the Middle East should have ended with Afghanistan. Instead, we seem to have an ever-expanding list of enemies, which coincides uncomfortably with the list of nations which have sponsored recent terrorism against Israel. (Iraq, Iran and Syria.) I can see Israel’s interest in having the US take on those nations. I’m just not sure I see the US interest in same.
I don’t buy the “protecting energy supplies” argument. We could quit the Middle East entirely, and whoever is left would still need to sell us their oil. Oil is a fungible commodity.
We “support” Egypt and Jordan because they made peace with Israel. Our “support” for them is indirectly just another species of support for Israel.
I just don’t buy it. What would be Iran’s motive for attacking the US? Seems to me they are seeking nuclear weapons for deterrence value – to keep us from attacking them.
We can at least agree that naivete must needs be remedied. The naive wind up as pawns.
To refresh your memory:
This little broad-brush goodie clearly suggests that it is impossible to express such criticism in the U.S. without being labeled an extremist and/or bigot.
Whiny bullshit.
Another distortion, as I was clear on the point that most critiques of Israeli policy are not anti-Semitic.
This is an invention of your buggy little mind.
I made no mention of “guilt by association”. I suggest once again that screeching about accusations of anti-Semitism where there are none is an obstruction to legitimate debate. This (as well as ignoring or minimizing anti-Semitism where it does rear its slimy little head) plays into the hands of bigots.
Your oversensitivity is a bore and based on gross exaggeration. What I do care about is preventing the bigots from using debate about the Middle East as an acceptable cover for their hatred.
Actually, I wasn’t. I was talking about the 1967 and 1973 wars.
But Israel didn’t start the recent one against Hezbollah, either.
No. Where did you get that from? In no way do I hold anyone responsible for the actions of terrorists, except the terrorist. Please show me where I said that. I said, and you quoted me, that terrorism is a HUMAN response. And that its use needs to be understood, so that it can be eradicated.
Understood. Not sympathized with. Not colluded with. Not sanctioned. Not allowed.
Understood. Sort of like child abuse needs to be understood and its root causes eradicated in order to decrease its frequency. If you think that meeting aggression with more aggression solves problems, you are wrong. The cycle continues for generations. This seems obvious, no?
The Palestinians need to reign in their extreme groups (if they even can) and commit to a course of negotiation and cease-fire. Israel needs to do the same. They both need to work to build trust–which will takes years. And it will require work and concessions and trust and courage and willingness on both parts. Bombing shit is easier, I guess.
I am not in the least ashamed of myself, nor should I be. I am not a racist, nor am I anti-semitic.
I am sorry for: 1. losing my temper and hurling insults. Most here know I don’t do so often; I put it down to so not being listened to and being dismissed out of hand by those who think they’re right. And 2. I have no idea why my post posted three times. If a mod can fix that, I’d appreciate.
Polamalu --I have no idea what you are referring to?
From here, I see that there is no introspection on the part of the Israelis on this bb. (I can’t tell about any Palestinians, they haven’t weighed in here-and I also cannot tell you how sick I am of always having to mention the Palestinians when criticizing the Israelis–the two are separate entities and should be independently evaluated).
I see no consideration of POVs other than their own. If we don’t agree with you, we must be either anti-Israeli or anti-Semitic or both. I am neither, and I refuse to be categorized as such. Nor am I pro-Palestinian or pro-Arab–but I am not anti either of them, either. I am anti some things they do and I am anti some things Israel does. How hard is this to figure out? It is possible to sit on the sidelines of a fight and not only see that both sides have some merit to their case, but also deplore the fight entirely.
Sometimes I think that God is up there laughing his ass off, saying to herself, “they never did figure out that the REAL Holy Land is Tierra del Fuego.” I see this whole “struggle” as one of shedding blood and entrenching prejudices for a few scraps of desert. IMO, if God were truly worshipped, where you did it wouldn’t matter.
It’s damned tragedy that people can’t see that. It’s horrid that children are raised to hate.
And i suggest that screeching “anti-Semitism” where there is none, as some supporters of Israeli policy do, is also an obstruction to legitimate debate. You can keep kidding yourself that it doesn’t happen, but you’re plain wrong.
Well again, it’s because we expect more of them. Think about it-the terrorist groups you expect to be assholes, so while yeah, you’re gonna criticize them, what do you expect?
But Israel is held to higher standards because they’re supposed to be the good guys. I don’t think Hamas, for example, is going to be all that willing to listen to people condemning them-they’re terrorists, that’s their whole purpose. Israel though, hey, you guys are supposed to know better!
(Yeesh, I sound like my parents.)