A reminder to think before you speak - Israel and Palestine edition

[Scootaloo]

As we all sit, and watch news, read DU, listen to podcasts of the news, we all have feelings... and evidently very strong feelings, with regards to the ongoing crisis in Gaza. Some peopel have taken sides, others have declared how fed-up they are with both, others are confused, all are pretty vocal about it.

And that's good. We should all feel so strongly about all crises facing communities in the world. But i just want to put it out there...

say what you mean and mean what you say.

No, this isn't a "play nice, people" rejoinder - I'll leave that to the admins, if they feel they wish to pipe in. This is me asking that people think before they hit the "send" button.

Nadinbrzinski has declared to me - and undoubtedly others - that she is ditching DU over comparisons between Israel and Nazi Germany. While she and i don't see eye-to-eye (and didn't, in the PM exchange) I can't really argue with her point. Again; I'm not asking you to play nice. But if you want to make that comparison, make sure it is really what you want to say. is it the best you have? Is it the most accurate you've got? Or is it just knee-jerk invective and grabbing at low-hanging fruit? Present your rationale, build your case, stand by your position, and correct yourself if you cannot.

Same goes the other way. Do you really want to drag out the corpses from the Munich Olympics, to justify the corpses of today? is that how you really feel, or are you just trying to throw your "side's" dead into another person's face in hope that it'll silence them? do you really feel Palestinians have brought this misery and death on their own heads, or is it just an aegis you hide behind to deflect from an otherwise indefensible position? Again, present your rationale, build your case, stand by your position, and correct yourself if you cannot.

I don't ask that people hold hands and frolic together. I'm not going to explain that the person on the other end of the connection is a person. You all already know that. No, what I'm saying is, spare us al lthe useless "gotcha" comments. leave the bland, thoughtless comparisons and accusations at home. If you must use them, build them, make them worth the while. if you CAN'T do that, then they're not worth your while either.

[JI7]

1. i feel a lot of people who are doing it are doing it purposely to STICK IT

to Jews. and yes i mean JEWS , not just israelis.

just look at how people got offended at any mention of nazis and wwII when we talk about Putin and in those cases people are not even trying to accuse him of being a killing a bunch of people.

or even when Assad gassed his own people.

[MH1]

27. I disagree. I haven't used that term but I don't see why it would be against "JEWS" as you say.

It is strictly about Israel and specifically what the state of Israel is doing NOW. Officially. (Not, like Putin, an action they deny while actually doing it anyway.)

Most of us non-Jews in the US have MANY Jewish friends, among which opinions vary quite widely as to what is going on in I/P. I don't bring up the topic but I see snippets on facebook pages and also know from previous discussions, who stands where (in general) with regards to Israel's treatment of Palestinians. If I took the extremes of my Jewish friends and put them in a room together and forced them to discuss this topic (trust me, I wouldn't) they would be at each other's throats as much as DUers are over this topic, each calling the other (or at least the other's views) such things as "evil" and "bent on the destruction of Israel".

As to relating the current horrors being visited on the people of Gaza:

1. I agree with the OP. It is not helpful to invoke Godwin's law, ever.
2. That said, to AN INDIVIDUAL in Gaza, who is doing NOTHING but trying to live their life in a place in which they were born and FROM WHICH THEY CANNOT ESCAPE (this is an extremely key point), the terror and growing hatred must be akin to what went was experienced by a victim of any of history's genocides, slaughters, annihilations, whatever you want to call them: Rwanda, Cambodia, Armenia, Native Americans ... and Jews whenever they have been singled out (including The Era That Shall Not Be Named)... and even as I type, all those just trying to live their lives but being caught in the middle now in Syria, Egypt, Iraq (try being a Christian in Mosul lately? I bet Jews aren't doing so well there either), and so on ... many places I and probably most of us at DU don't even know about.

Terror is terror.

Please don't automatically assume the worst of other DUers who disagree with you. Just because someone is upset with what Netanyahu is doing and uses strong rhetoric to express it, doesn't mean they hate all Jews. Why would they? Plenty of Jews are also upset with what Netanyahu is doing.

[hfojvt]

39. I think it is better to talk about yourself

than to talk about "most" people.

"Most of us non-Jews in the US have MANY Jewish friends,"

Puts me squarely in the minority then. I don't have ANY Jewish friends.

First of all, because I don't really have any friends. Second, even among my "aquaintances" and FB "friends" and people I know from the past, I can only think of ONE Jewish Professor that I knew in grad school, and I never even took a class from him.

And as for "terror and growing hatred". You mention Native Americans. Well, the "terror and growing hatred" was on BOTH sides.

"For the settlers, who suffered less in terms of fatalities, the constant violence, the unpredictability of sudden attacks, and the sight of atrocities reminiscent of the worst excesses of European wars bred an ever-present anxiety, a sense of dread and apprehension that permeated everyday existence." The Barbarous Years p 501

And the death rates of settlers to America were sometimes pretty astounding. From the same source

"But when Smith left for England in October 1609 the signs, as winter approached, were ominous. Indian attacks were multiplying, the outer settlements were destroyed, and stragglers, foragers, and exploring parties were routinely killed. Supplies for the expanded population dwindled, especially after rats devoured much of the corn reserve. Diseases continued to ravage the settlers." p. 60

"By May 1610, when the remainder of the delayed flotilla of 1609, including the new interim governor, Sir Thomas Gates, finally arrived, only sixty of the four hundred of the previous spring and summer were alive ..." p. 61

And probably the only reason those 60 did not die as well, was because they were rescued by that flotilla. So the death rate was "only" 85%.

In this current conflict with 2,000 Palestinian deaths, the death rate is 0.1%. (so far). Not to say that 2,000 is no big deal, but at the same time, 2,000 simply is NOT as big a deal as 20,000 or 200,000. If Israel really was deliberately trying to kill civilians, what would the death total be?

[840high]

58. Yep.

[Fozzledick]

2. Who are you and what have you done with Scootaloo?

[edgineered]

54. In the film "Source Code" that question brings a smile. nt

[ErikJ]

3. I do find it somewhat ironic that the theocratic Tea Party is siding with Israel

which is a secular socialistic democracy and the Progressives are siding with the theocratic Muslim Hamas.

[Fozzledick]

4. I don't consider those who side with Hamas to be at all progressive.

That's just a disguise they wear to hide their true agenda.

And the evangelical fundamentalist theocrats just want to use Israel to fulfill their prophecies so they can get themselves raptured, leaving the rest of us in a hell on Earth.

[think]

6. Dead kids are dead kids

sides are irrelevant....

[Fozzledick]

7. Parroting Hamas' anti-Israel propaganda only encourages them to get more kids killed.

[think]

8. Excuse me?

[Fozzledick]

13. OK, you're excused.

I wasn't addressing you personally, but after all the shit that's been flying around here lately I've become hyper-sensitive to any suggestion that Israel is to blame for Hamas' human sacrifice strategy or any hint of a "both sides are bad so blame Israel" moral evasion.

[malaise]

24. Israel is to blame for Hamas' human sacrifice strategy???

Fact - Israel has killed close to 1,400 Palestinians.

[Fozzledick]

40. See? THIS is exactly the kind of shit I'm talking about.

[Comrade Grumpy]

56. I'm sorry, but Israel has to take responsibility for its own actions.

Hamas CHOOSES to fire rockets at Israel that manage to do almost zero damage.

Israel CHOOSES to fire all kinds of things at Gaza, killing more than a thousand civilians, flattening whole neighborhoods, destroying vital infrastructure, and imposing collective punishment.

Enough with your wife-beater excuses. "She made me do it."

[Fozzledick]

62. Enough with your disingenuous excuses for aggressive war and terrorism.

[2banon]

50. And that's just this round.

I forget the cumulative death count just over this past decade.. but Israel's strategy is to bomb Gaza every couple of years forever, or until most of the population has finally been wiped out. Paid for by you and me.

[840high]

60. Hamas is just as guilty.

[Hissyspit]

17. And parroting Israel's anti-Palestinian propaganda doesn't?

[intaglio]

31. Did you notice the title of this thread?

And why do you believe parroting Hamas' propaganda is any more harmful than the ignoramuses who propagate Israeli propaganda?

[Fozzledick]

46. Parroting Hamas' propaganda is more harmful

because it encourages and enables them to kill more civilians. Without a receptive audience they would have no reason to do it.

[intaglio]

49. Propagating Israeli propaganda

encourages and enables them to kill far more civilians than the international community would allow if Israel did not spread their lies and deceptions. Without a receptive audience they would have no-one believing in the probity of the IDF and the war crimes would be prosecuted on both sides.

Oh, by the way which group, Hamas or the IDF, has killed more women, children and elderly and non-combatant adult males than the other?

[Fozzledick]

61. Hamas is responsible for ALL the deaths on both sides.

Supporting them is simply obscene.

[intaglio]

64. What a peice of work your post is

Every post you make on this subject exposes you a a witting or unwitting mouthpiece of an outlaw government.

You impose upon Hamas - a very small minority of the population in Gaza - the burden of every death but I ask you who is pulling the trigger? Who authorised this particular invasion?

The excuses you are making are in exactly the same class as those made by George W Bush to justify the invasion of Iraq; the same vapid reasoning that allowed the invasion of Grenada under Reagan. To be honest your argument is that "they brought it on themselves," something I have heard from right wing nut jobs justifying the Shoah or KKK lynchings of innocents or the massacre of the Native American tribes.

Mind you you are in good company; this vile denial of responsibility is exactly the same one attributed to God justifying the Flood, the destruction of the Cities of the Plain, the multiple massacres of the Midianites and all the other atrocities in the Old Testament. Personally I do not support the revenge fantasies sourced from primitive tribal faiths; I do not buy into such nauseating self justifications and will continue trying to expose those who use them as persons for ethics and morality are just a matter of negotiation.

[Fozzledick]

66. I would have thought Hamas' apologists would be ashamed to show their faces today.

It seems they have no shame.

[intaglio]

68. I have never made apology for Hamas,

I have criticised the Government of Israel and Hamas. I do raise the matter of innocent Palestinians killed by Israeli forces. I have raised the issue of a child reduced to a lump of shredded meat by a flechette shell, the use of which in areas with civilians is a war crime. Were the IDF forced to use such sickening weaponry by Hamas?

By your sick and perverted logic Hamas is responsible for the all the other children killed by an Israeli government that ignores the conventions of war; it is responsible for Israel ignoring UN resolutions since 1948; is it Hamas that is responsible for all the assassinations by Kidon overseas; is it Hamas with the aircraft and helicopters and the tanks and the missile shield and the naval guns. You cannot admit that all that Hamas is responsible for in the current conflict is a vastly ineffective missile barrage that has take between 3 and 5 lives.

I called your logic sick and perverted but in truth it seems more than that for you apparently regard all Palestinians as less than human, as if they were somehow worth less than an Israeli

[Fozzledick]

69. You contradict yourself.

[intaglio]

70. Where or are you just making stuff up? n/t

[whatchamacallit]

91. +1

somewhere a bridge...

[m-lekktor]

23. so those of who are against Israel slaughtering the Palestinians while they

gather on the hills to eat popcorn and cheer it on are NOT progressives? OK gotcha.

[randome]

25. Apparently neither was John Lennon.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[truedelphi]

5. Progressives are certainly not "Siding" with a theocracy...

We are siding with the concept that children need to grow up in peace.

Be they Palestinian children, Syrian children, Iraqi children, or whomever.

We also find it deplorable that tens of billions of US tax dollars have gone into helping Israel have the weaponry they possess. Every single dead Palestinian toddler represents half a million Americans who might have benefited from some of those dollars going into local HeadStart programs, or monies to shore up the failing infra structure..

My community struggled these past months to find $ 40,000 to repair a local swimming pool. But our nation spends over 5 million bucks a day to help keep its ally Israel strong and well equipped with all the latest baby killing machinery.

But hey, it is all good. The DOW is over 16,000 in part due to how much gets spent on equipment to kill people, surveil people, etc.

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2014/07/31/world-condemns-attack-gaza-us-resupplies-israel-weapons

[Bluenorthwest]

33. Dear one, the US sends much aid to many countries who have laws against being gay

Our President and VP smile at Pope, who is a raging anti gay propagandist claiming gay people are part of Satan's plans. We, the US, maintain 'ally' relationships with Saudi Arabia and other States that execute people for being gay. It strikes me as odd that I never, ever see posts condemning that shit. If it is all about justice and equality, why is it selective justice and situational equality?

What you omit from your concerns speaks strongly about you and your truth.


I understand that many of the folks here are openly anti gay, I have seen anti gay posts in the threads about Gaza and that's part of why I don't take part. Haters do not get my heart. Bigots are never of any value to the world.

[randome]

34. Being anti-gay, abhorrent on its own, does not compare to killing children.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[Bluenorthwest]

92. I was comparing killing of gay people to killing of other people. Is that wrong in your eyes?

Some people executed for being gay are in fact minors under our law, so they are gay children. We have many very vile allies. That's my point. Many nation who do many horrible things get our tax funded aid. Those nations include nations which openly execute people for being gay.
I point out, and you demonstrate, that Straight folks don't give a shit about that.

[randome]

93. I agree that the U.S., as a country, should make more demands -where we can- on equal rights.

Whether that's in support of gays or women or any other group designated as 'enemies' of the state.

I have said in the past that I wished we would withhold trade favors and use diplomatic muscle to stop the killing and the subjugation.

If we're going to be the world's police, I would want it to be in pursuit of these goals rather than in enhancing our economies.

But religion -always a bane on human existence- is not so easily persuaded to play nice with others. As Israel demonstrates.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Where do uncaptured mouse clicks go?[/center][/font][hr]

[truedelphi]

55. I am not sure that I get the gist of your remark.

This nation has been anti-gay until just recently. I mean, fifty years ago, most citizens here were virulently anti-gay.

And we are still against women, yet we use as a selling tool for our wars the fact that women in other nations wear a burkha. (Women here wear a burkha also, as the societal requirement that we all be a size 4. We women have to be anorexic in order to qualify as "real" women. I didn't eat a real meal from the time I was 19 until I was 24.)

Yet women I know who go into the Armed Services have had very degrading and dangerous things happen to them, at the hands of their "fellow" service people, and nothing is done about that?

Anyway, I was posting about the issue of people desiring for kids to grow up in peace. What that has to do with being gay, I don't know. You are aware that of the many kids recently killed in Gaza, some of them w ould have grown up to be LBGT, although I am hoping you are not suggesting that only the gay children in that crowd should be mourned.

BTW, one Barack Obama did not openly support the quest of gay people for their civil rights until recently, as he was trying to appeal to the rather conservative types of fellow African Americans who don't support being gay. But he gets a free pass, doesn't he, no matter what!

[JI7]

9. the teabaggers aren't siding with a seculary socialist democracy and progressive aren't siding with

theocratic muslims.

teabaggers are just enjoying seeing arabs/muslims/brown people get killed.

progressives think kids shouldn't be killed because of the govt they live under.

[JI7]

11. do you seriously think teabaggers support israel because of their welfare system ?

[MH1]

28. Being against the destruction of Gaza, including murder of children, is NOT siding with Hamas.

Let's be clear on that point.

My observation is that "progressives" tend to be anti-war or at least anti- state-visited destruction, and expect the stronger state (in this case Israel) to find ways to solve problems that don't involve blowing up children or their homes.

I'm not sure this "peacenik" view is always practical with the current state of the world - I don't want to get into that argument now though - but I think that is why you see "progressives" siding against the actions of Israel. (which isn't the same as siding with Hamas).

As to the Tea Party, extremist theocratic Muslims are a competitor in their market, so of course they are against them.

[TeamPooka]

53. This

[BlindTiresias]

59. The ruling party coalition of Israel is not secular.

[Warren DeMontague]

10. Nadin's a she, I'm pretty certain.

Just FYI, you may want to revise your OP accordingly.

[Scootaloo]

14. Did not know; edited accordingly

[longship]

12. Nonsense, a pox on both of their houses.

Were it not for religion, this would have been solved ages ago. Both have staked claims on the land, "from god".

A hideous pox on both of them.

[whistler162]

21. No... family fueds tend to last a long time.

Look at the current flair up of the Market Basket family, look at the De Havilland sister they hadn't talked for 30+ years.

This is one branch of the family not getting along with the other, with a little bit of religion mixed in as a binder.

[randome]

15. The 'gotcha' works from both directions.

If one's criticism of Israel and religion goes too far, there is an observable moment when, "Ah-ha! You're anti-semitic!" becomes the call of the hour.

But at the end of the day, one can always put on one's magic clothes and read something from a magic listology and all will be well.

There was an OP with a photo of a beautiful young woman kneeling to light a candle in sympathy with the Palestinians. Beautiful, comfortable, safe. No evidence of outrage, she was simply doing something that looked cool in a photo.

And that's how it is with the religious nuts, too. So long as they are comfortable, it isn't 'fair' to call attention to what their religion has wrought.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."
Leonard Cohen, Anthem (1992)[/center][/font][hr]

[Spider Jerusalem]

16. I don't really think any comparison of Israel with Nazi Germany is fair or accurate, personally.

The USA's policy toward Native Americans, certainly (especially in terms of settlement expansion and relocation of the indigenous people, in this case, the Palestinians). But that's a very different thing to the deliberate policy of extermination carried out by the Nazis.

[Hissyspit]

18. It doesn't have to be an exact analogy.

It's the shame and the irony, too: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017206379

[Bluenorthwest]

35. But Americans avoid the equation to treatment of Native Americans which is a better analogy

and I think they do so because it makes their arguments so hypocritical. 'I sit here on land stolen from people we moved to the other side of the country and I condemn land theft' just lacks a certain ring to it.
No one, no one, said anything about a 'perfect analogy'. But the Native Americans or even the indigenous Australians make a BETTER analogy that the Nazi thing, and it has the bonus of putting judgment toward your own society as opposed to veering toward the bigoted. If one says something rather bigoted and naff in order to avoid admitting guilt for land theft and cultural decimation I find that to be telling.
So you claim that it is nothing like the American analogy? America did not kill, move and force onto tiny patches of land millions of native peoples? Really?

[hfojvt]

41. yes, really

Kill? Yeah, there was some killing - on all sides. Killing of Indians by whites, killing of whites by Indians and killing of Indians by other Indians.

What were the whites of Connecticut supposed to do when King Phillip's war started, just throw down their guns and beg for mercy?

Move?

Yeah, there's all kinds of movement. How did the Sioux end up in the Dakotas? They were forced to move there by the Ojibwe. And when they moved there they drove off the Crows and the Kiowa. Blackhawk wrote in his autobiography about the settlement of Saukenuk by the Sauk Indians "They all descended Rock river - drove the Kas-kas-kias from the country, and commenced the erection of their village, determined never to leave it." p. 46

Force onto tiny patches of land?

Indians held 138 million acres in 1887. If their population was 500,000 at the time, that is 276 acres for every man woman or child. One of my ancestors moved to Wisconsin in 1861 with his wife and 11 children (his two oldest having already married and presumably left home, although young married couples often still lived with their parents in those days). He originally bought 40 acres and then later bought another 80. That's 120 acres for a family of 13, less than 10 acres per person.

We sit on land stolen from the natives?

No, time after time, we paid for that land. The natives usually got paid, even though the Sauk did not bother to pay the Kas-kas-kias anything. Nor did the Ojibwe pay the Sioux or the Sioux pay the Crows for the land they took, and so on.

But I know, it is a major heresy to deny the whole "white people are awful" view of history.

[TheKentuckian]

65. You paid for your slaves too, we didn't kidnap those folks and enslave them!

We paid good money and provided transportation to a new world providing eventual opportunities they could have never got at home.

Bought! Bead necklaces, whiskey, petty cash (sometimes never paid even) to people many of whom had no concept of individual ownership of property nor currency. Other times the "purchase" was from other motherfuckers who had claimed lands as their own sometimes even without the knowledge of those who possessed it.
And those that didn't "sell" where often slaughtered and forcibly removed anyway and then the fucking nerve to talk about the wealth of acreages (often worthless desert and arid wilderness in exchange for good land) as compared to the intrepid white pioneers is disgusting.

[bravenak]

77. +1

[cpwm17]

19. Analogies are just that, analogies

When there are significant similarities to past events it is fair to point those out. It is not fair to use past events to rational current evil. That is not the same thing at all.

No one in this world is more sacred than the other, no matter what religion they practice. If someone is supporting evil they lose the right to take offense to appropriate analogies.

If Nadinbrzinski can't stand the analogies then she shouldn't support situations where some obvious analogies may be appropriate. If you can't take the heat then don't start the fire. That applies to both Israel and its supporters.

[randome]

20. "...no matter what religion they practice."

I agree with what you said but I can't help but see that the primary purpose of religion is to divide and categorize people. Sure, we're all the same but these people over here are Catholic and these over here are Jews and those in that corner are Mormons. Which means we are not the same according to those who support such categorization.

If it was good enough for John Lennon to support casting off such categorizations, why isn't it good enough today?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A 90% chance of rain means the same as a 10% chance:
It might rain and it might not.[/center][/font][hr]

[cpwm17]

22. Thank you for agreeing

I was somewhat afraid to post this due to the strong emotions. But it can't be said enough: we are all intrinsically equal. Once someone values one life over the other, and acts on it, we can see where that leads.

I also agree with you about the harm of religion.

[hfojvt]

43. "the primary purpose of religion"

You might make that a primary result, but the primary purpose of religion is "to get people to be good". Religious people have commandments that they are supposed to follow, things like "love your neighbor as yourself", "do unto others as you would have them do unto you", "do not steal", "do not bear false witness", "do not kill", etc., etc.

The primary purpose is to teach certain truths and to strive to live right.

Of course, then people act like people and start to believe "only a small elect group has the REAL truth and only WE are living right" and the churches become human institutions which accumulate property and then the humans fight over this valuable property.

Sure there are perhaps better ways to teach people to be good, and maybe even better defintions of what it means to actually be "good". But to wish, like John Lennon, for "no religion" is to deny the good that actually does get done in the name of religion, in small ways and large.

[randome]

45. Corporations have papers, too. And bylaws.

What's the difference between religion and Christine Todd Whitman's belief that she was a witch? To say that religion serves any purpose other than to divide is the same as saying guns are good, too. It's only how they're used that is bad.

While that may be true in a limited sense, most would agree that the fewer guns around, the fewer 'accidents'.

And the fewer people who say magic words while dressed in their magic clothes would cause fewer 'accidents', as well.

IMO.

I have never been more disgusted with religion than I have been this past month.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[hfojvt]

51. the purpose of a gun IS to kill

that's what they are made for.

Religion has a primary purpose. And people find many reasons to be divided other than religion - see nation states, see language, which often divides us.

Like if there was no religion than there would be no division among humanity. Religion, in fact, TRIES, to unite people, to make us ALL children of God. What you are doing is like blaming a toothbrush for tooth decay. Because brushing does not prevent every cavity does not mean that the brushing causes cavities much less that the purpose of brushing is to create cavities.

[randome]

67. You really think religion was created to do good?

Have you followed much in the way of history? What is a religion? Is it Scientology? Is it belief in a supernatural mystic who knows when we've been bad and when we've been good? Is it women subjecting themselves to men?

Guns can be used for good or ill. So can religion. And like guns, religion will inevitably be used to subjugate or, in the case of Israel, to kill.

I don't see that the good outweighs the bad. What is 'good' about religion? Charity work? How many religions even participate? Very few from what I've seen. Is it 'spreading the message'? That 'message' is stupid if it has to do with unquestioning belief in a supernatural being.

Obviously you and I aren't going to 'settle' this debate. But I want my words out there so some will see the truth. You don't need religion to be kind to people. You don't need religion to unite us. All religion does is divide.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A 90% chance of rain means the same as a 10% chance:
It might rain and it might not.[/center][/font][hr]

[defacto7]

81. Hear, Hear!

n/t

[onenote]

90. but not all analogies are good analogies. and bad analogies mislead

Which is, I think, an underlying element of the OP's request.

[Capt. Obvious]

26. Nadin won't be gone long

[MerryBlooms]

30. Until mid August, according to her transparency page. :(

[L0oniX]

44. Damn!

They finally got her. The effort to stop her voice has won ...and it's another sad temp loss for DU.

[JI7]

76. in this case it's not the usual ones she has a problem with that are responsible

for her being gone.

[steve2470]

29. Here's my nuanced position

1- In general, I support Israel, as long as they obey international law.

2- I support the right of the Palestinians to have a separate state and to be free from interference.

3- Both sides (Israel, Hamas, and other militant organizations) are to blame over the last 66 years. How much, I'm not an expert.

4- The killing needs to stop NOW, from both sides, especially Israel.

5- Israel has gone way over the line, from simple "self-defense" to conducting a war.

6- A negotiated permanent peace is necessary, with adequate land granted to the Palestinians to have their own state and with borders completely opened to conduct the operations of normal living.

7- Comparisons to Nazi Germany are a) inaccurate, b) offensive to the Holocaust survivors, c) tend to diminish the absolutely horrific scope of the Holocaust, and d) not necessary. EVERYONE outside of Israel wants the killing to stop !

[bemildred]

32. +1. nt

[Agschmid]

36. Good post.

[Spazito]

37. Agree, well said n/t

[snpsmom]

89. Thank you. n/t

[sufrommich]

38. Comparing Israel to nazis is hyperbolic anti semitism.Especially

when one considers the absolute silence from the international community regarding Syria.

Turning our backs on Syrian atrocities:

A photographer in the criminal and forensics department of the Syrian military police recently told a group at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, “My job on a daily basis was just regular accidents, burnings, drownings, routine things.” In late 2011, as the Syrian uprising intensified, his routine changed. The photographer was sent to the morgue at a military hospital to document the bodies of prisoners arriving from 24 regime intelligence branches and military units. Soon 50 to 60 mutilated, emaciated corpses were coming each day — so many they were kept in storage rooms and parking lots. “Some victims were brought alive to the morgue and killed,” he recalled.
Michael Gerson is a nationally syndicated columnist who appears twice weekly in The Post. View Archive

He was involved in archiving the pictures of corpses taken by all the military photographers. “Pictures of children,” he said, “pictures of the elderly, pictures of women. I saw pictures of my own neighbors, from my own village.” They were images not of terrorists but of a broad, populist movement.

The photographer decided he “could no longer take part.” But when he approached the opposition to defect, he was urged to stay, continue his work and smuggle out the archive on thumb drives. The result is 55,000 high-resolution photographs taken of more than 11,000 victims between September 2011 and August 2013. The corpses, variously, bear marks from being chained; their eyes have been gouged; there are dark spots left by electric shocks; most are gaunt from starvation. The pictures can’t be generally distributed, because Syrians might recognize family members they still think are alive.

The corpses in the photos are carefully identified by three numbers: their own identification number, the number of their medical pathology report and the number of the intelligence unit where they died. Why would the Syrian regime keep such meticulous records? The photographer, who goes for security reasons by the name Caesar, describes it as part of a bureaucratic routine in which “the higher-ups got proof their orders were carried out.” It is also the type of practice — witness Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union — employed by a government completely unconcerned with eventual accountability, because it believes it will win. As the Syrian regime assaults Aleppo, the last major city contested by the rebels, this belief is not unreasonable.

ab
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/michael-gerson-turning-our-backs-on-syrian-atrocities/2014/07/31/3668acd2-1816-11e4-85b6-c1451e622637_story.html


The world yawns with absolute indifference.

[el_bryanto]

42. I've never understood this but a lot of people come to DU believing they are in enemy territory

I'm not talking about RW trolls; it just seems like people come here expecting bad faith, dishonesty, and hatred. I don't always do this, but think it's best to assume that most of the people you are arguing with are doing so in good faith and are saying things they really believe. Conversation may prove that not to be the case; and at that point you can do what you like. But you can at least make an attempt to see the other person's point of view initially.

I have an opinion on the Israeli Palestinian conflict, but I can understand how a good person might well look at the information carefully and come to another conclusion than my own. And because of that I don't want to assume that the people on the other side of the fence are immoral monsters.

Bryant

[treestar]

47. I don't see why one cannot compare anything to anything else

And one is free to contrast. The "how dare you compare" thing is purely emotional reaction. There are similarities and there are differences and we are allowed to discuss them. Sometimes there is anti-intellectualism around here.

Even Nazi Germany is comparable and contrastable to things. The US may have some things in common with it. It has many things different.

There are differences between the Palestinians and the Native Americans and similarities.

It's an attempt to shut down discussion.

[AnalystInParadise]

48. Elections have consequences

That quote was from PBO, and it is a true statement. Hamas was elected, they have brought this doom onto the Palestinians heads. Violating a ceasefire by setting off a suicide vest and kidnapping an Israeli soldier 90 minutes after said cease fire began kind of tells the tale. Not to mention this is the SIXTH ceasefire Hamas has broken. So yes, elections have consequences and they have brought this onto their heads.

[MH1]

57. Yeah, all those children are definitely to blame for electing Hamas.

As are all those people who DIDN'T vote for Hamas.

Right?



Although, the seeming inability of Hamas to honor a cease-fire is also a "bang head" moment. There are multiple villains here. I'm just pretty sure none of them are six years old.

[AnalystInParadise]

73. That last senteence is a point we can actually agree on

n/t

[JI7]

71. that's like saying 9/11, Sandy Hook, Katrina were all deserved

[AnalystInParadise]

72. In the eyes of radical Islam

9/11 was deserved. I don't believe that but many radicalized jihadi's do. In this case though, yes the Palestinians brought this doom onto themselves.

Katrina was a natural disaster, non sequitur does not apply

And Sandy Hook was the result of mental illness, another apples to orangutans comparison.

[JI7]

74. people could have been saved during Katrina, which is my point but Bush as President

meant people deserved what they got.

Sandy Hook involved Gun Nuts .

so yes, it's still the same thing. based on your logic all of those things were deserved.

[AnalystInParadise]

82. Are you really trying

to draw a comparison between 9/11, Palestine, Hurricane Katrina and Sandy Hook? Ok strange person, I think we are done here.

But yes the Palestinians deserve it. Elections have consequences.

[JI7]

83. 9/11, Katrina, Sandy Hoook and Elections have Consequences

[Violet_Crumble]

86. Palestinian civilians DO NOT deserve to be indiscriminately killed....

Nothing justifies the killing of civilians in large numbers like this. Using that warped logic, if the boot was on the other foot and large numbers of Israeli civilians were being killed, they'd deserve it because elections have consequences...

[MrBig]

52. +1000

I often strongly disagree with your posts on the issue but I respect the hell out of where the opinions are coming from after reading this.

I got depressed reading some of the responses, especially in the posts about French and Belgian anti-Semitism and attempts to justify it.

You can disagree with Israel without collectively punishing Jews just like you can disagree with Hamas without collectively punishing Palestinians and Arabs.

Collective hatred is flat out wrong.

[2banon]

63. Good OP scootaloo..

[BainsBane]

75. I made a similar point a week or so ago

and you disagreed.

[cheapdate]

78. I don't always agree with you, but I'll second that.

And I'd miss Nadinbrzinski if she leaves.

[deathrind]

79. The Settlements is the issue here.

I need not espouse a history or back ground here. It is available for anyone to simply research.

Every civilization has a right to decent itself collectively or individually...everyone.

[MannyGoldstein]

80. K&R. I wish I'd seen this earlier.

While I don't always agree with you, I certainly agree with you on *this*.

I wish you'd write more OPs, you're one of the best thinkers and writers on this site.

[Scootaloo]

88. I take that to be indicative of a very low standard here!

[defacto7]

84. Did you really mean to start this

shit storm? This seems a bit... unusual... so probably not.

I guess some have a knack for reading positive posts and only see negative. But we all see what we want to see and write what we want... to see. 'Not sure what happened here.

[Scootaloo]

85. I'm not seeing a shit-storm...

But then, I've taken a preventative measure to spare myself the urge to head-butt my monitor. They're not cheap, these LCD screens.

What i'm seeing - lucky me - is a few people misunderstanding my point, but, eh, oh well, that's just how it goes sometimes.

[defacto7]

87. Well, nice op!

But I think I'll start a thread that says, "Gee wilickers everyone, let's be friends and always get along and everything is awesome all the time with Legos." Then watch the cat/dog fights, hair flying... I'd probably get 300 comments!