GAZA

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Recent analysis suggests the Gaza operation is simply a test before the Iran air strike on nuke facilities.

So Iran has been sneaking long-rang rockets into Gaza to use Hamas in retaliatory strikes if Israel attacks...so you preempt by removing Hamas leadership and said rockets. Then attack Iran in self defense.

Additionally you test new Egyptian leadership, so far Egypt is acting pretty rational, they just can't (or don't want to) control the Sinai.

The US has invested 200M in Iron Dome and I believe Congress is prepared to spend another 600M on the project over the next several years.

Big question, does Egypt want to continue to receive US aid?

-spence

So if I understand you correctly, you believe Israel is launching a pre-emptive strike against Hamas.

How is it a pre-emptive strike if Hamas has been lobbing rockets into Israel for the last 10 days? Seems to me that you could make a compelling case that this is not a pre-emptive strike, but rather a totally justified act of self-defense. I guess MSNBC isn't spinning it that way, so you aren't aware of that possibility.

Spence, what are the Israelis supposed to do, when Hamas specifically targets civilian areas to lob a few rockets into? Moreover, the Hamas leadership (the guys who order the rocket attacks) go out of their way to hide among their own civilians, using them as shields.

[cheferson]

So it's ok for us to give arms to Israel ( 3 dead so far ) , but not for Egypt or Iran to do the same for the Palestinians(over 100 dead with many children/civilians ) ?

[buckman]

Originally Posted by cheferson

So it's ok for us to give arms to Israel ( 3 dead so far ) , but not for Egypt or Iran to do the same for the Palestinians(over 100 dead with many children/civilians ) ?

You do know Iran wants us dead ...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by cheferson

So it's ok for us to give arms to Israel ( 3 dead so far ) , but not for Egypt or Iran to do the same for the Palestinians(over 100 dead with many children/civilians ) ?

Cheferson, it is horrible, absolutely tragic, that the Palestinians have lost so many civilians.

But I'll ask again...if Hamas starts lobbing missiles into Israeli civilian areas, and the Hamas military leaders intentionally operate in civilian areas (using their own civilians as shields), what is Israel supposed to do? What are they supposed to do?

I'll also say that as lopsided as a 100-3 casualty ratio may appear...war is not supposed to be a game where everybody wins. You don't let the other side score a few points to make them feel bettter. The goal is 100-0, not 100-3. You try to avoid hurting non-combatants on the other side, but in the end, all that matters is protecting your own. That's ugly, but it's reality.

Yes, it's OK for us to give arms to Israel, and it's not OK for anyone to arm the Palestinians. Here's why. If the Palestinians never fired another shot, neither would Israel. If Israel never fired another shot, they would be annihilated.

There is a moral distinction between the the attacker and the person who gets attacked and fights back. Not that the Israelis haven't made mistakes. But you can't say with a straight face that they are routinely the aggressor. Israel has made enormous concessions in the West Bank and in Gaza. It wasn't enough, it will never be enough.

[likwid]

Originally Posted by buckman

You do know Iran wants us dead ...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yes, everyone believes the Iranian version of Rush Limbaugh.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by buckman

You do know Iran wants us dead ...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Relevantly, much of the hate from Iran towards the US stems from US policy with regards to Israel-Palestine relations.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by likwid

Yes, everyone believes the Iranian version of Rush Limbaugh.

So if they develop a nuke, that wouldn't concern you?

Not everyone who says Iran is a threat, is a right-wing rdical. However, the only folks saying that we don't need to worry about Iran, are themselves radicals. Misinformed radicals.

Most folks agree that if Iran is a barbaric regime, hell-bent on enslaving as many people as possible under their thumb.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

So if I understand you correctly, you believe Israel is launching a pre-emptive strike against Hamas.

No, it's a preemptive strike against Iran.

-spence

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by spence

Recent analysis suggests the Gaza operation is simply a test before the Iran air strike on nuke facilities.

So Iran has been sneaking long-rang rockets into Gaza to use Hamas in retaliatory strikes if Israel attacks...so you preempt by removing Hamas leadership and said rockets. Then attack Iran in self defense.



-spence

Then there is a different theory.
Iran sneaks longer range rockets through Sudan to Gaza to show Israel that
if it attacks Iran's nuclear sites they are open to attack from Iran and Gaza, now being able to hit Jeruselem and Tel Aviv.
Kinda makes more sense as Gaza is the one who strarted the rocket attacks.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

Relevantly, much of the hate from Iran towards the US stems from US policy with regards to Israel-Palestine relations.

So we let Iran bully us into changing our foreign policy?

If the barbaric kooks in Iran hate what we're doing in the Middle East, that's pretty good reason for me to assume we are doing the right thing.

The Civil Rights workers who fought in the segregated south used to have a saying..."if the Klan is shooting at you, you must be doing something right".

Happy Thanksgiving Johnny. Following UCONN hoops at all?

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by justplugit

Then there is a different theory.
Iran sneaks longer range rockets through Sudan to Gaza to show Israel that
if it attacks Iran's nuclear sites they are open to attack from Iran and Gaza, now being able to hit Jeruselem and Tel Aviv.
Kinda makes more sense as Gaza is the one who strarted the rocket attacks.

That's how I see it
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by justplugit

Then there is a different theory.
Iran sneaks longer range rockets through Sudan to Gaza to show Israel that
if it attacks Iran's nuclear sites they are open to attack from Iran and Gaza, now being able to hit Jeruselem and Tel Aviv.

Isn't that what I just said?

It may be more likely for Iran to respond via proxy to avoid a direct counter attack if Iran used long-range missiles.

Kinda makes more sense as Gaza is the one who strarted the rocket attacks.

This is where the dysfunction of the situation muddies the water. A Gazan would argue that the Israeli blockades have killed their economy and they have a right to defend themselves.

With these protracted engagements it's hard to tell where individual elements really begin and end.

-spence

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

So we let Iran bully us into changing our foreign policy?

If the barbaric kooks in Iran hate what we're doing in the Middle East, that's pretty good reason for me to assume we are doing the right thing.

The Civil Rights workers who fought in the segregated south used to have a saying..."if the Klan is shooting at you, you must be doing something right".

Happy Thanksgiving Johnny. Following UCONN hoops at all?

Not necessarily. I think we should change our foreign policy with Israel because I think they are a bunch of instigators. They're like the little squirt who talks tough knowing that his big brother would come in and beat everyone up if he got in trouble.

Israel acts the way they do because the US is their safety net. Not much different than a lot of risks taken by banks in the financial sector who know that they have the government as a safety net should they be on the verge of going belly up.

Happy Thanksgiving to you too. Honestly, I don't follow any college sports at all - don't have the mental capacity for it.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

Not necessarily. I think we should change our foreign policy with Israel because I think they are a bunch of instigators. They're like the little squirt who talks tough knowing that his big brother would come in and beat everyone up if he got in trouble.

Israel acts the way they do because the US is their safety net. Not much different than a lot of risks taken by banks in the financial sector who know that they have the government as a safety net should they be on the verge of going belly up.

Happy Thanksgiving to you too. Honestly, I don't follow any college sports at all - don't have the mental capacity for it.

Israel has fought wars, all-out wars, which we did not fight in. the aye quite capabe of wiping the Palestinians off the face of the Earth, with no help from us. Maybe Iran too, as long as Iran doesn't have nukes. Given that Obama isn't as supportive of them as previous presidents, we may well find out the answer to that question in 2013.

In my humble opinion, Israel does the only thing it can do, given that they are literally surrounded by people who want to kill them. I worked with their military for a few months, it's tough to describe what they live with every day. I'm not saying they haven't done some things to fan the flames of hate, but I see them as a victim, not an instigator.

The banks did what they did to make money. Israel is trying to continue to exist.

I'm not objective, as my Mom comes from a line of Polish Jews, who let's say faced some hardships in the 1930's and 1940's.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Israel has fought wars, all-out wars, which we did not fight in. the aye quite capabe of wiping the Palestinians off the face of the Earth, with no help from us. Maybe Iran too, as long as Iran doesn't have nukes. Given that Obama isn't as supportive of them as previous presidents, we may well find out the answer to that question in 2013.

It is extremely misleading to say Israel has accomplished *anything at all* on their own. An average of $3 billion per year in aid to them since 1985, most of which is military and technology. Almost $80 billion over the course of 27 years. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL33222.pdf

Also, to say Obama isn't as supportive is like saying it hasn't rained as much in the rainforest this year. As I posted earlier, Obama just announced we're 'gifting' another $70million to Israel for their missile defense shield.

In the face of $16 trillion in debt and a trillion dollar deficit, I am completely intolerant of the billions of dollars we are shipping out of this country for completely lost causes - that includes Pakistan, Afghanistan, Africa and Israel.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

It is extremely misleading to say Israel has accomplished *anything at all* on their own. An average of $3 billion per year in aid to them since 1985, most of which is military and technology. Almost $80 billion over the course of 27 years. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL33222.pdf

Also, to say Obama isn't as supportive is like saying it hasn't rained as much in the rainforest this year. As I posted earlier, Obama just announced we're 'gifting' another $70million to Israel for their missile defense shield.

In the face of $16 trillion in debt and a trillion dollar deficit, I am completely intolerant of the billions of dollars we are shipping out of this country for completely lost causes - that includes Pakistan, Afghanistan, Africa and Israel.

"It is extremely misleading to say Israel has accomplished *anything at all* on their own."

I don't limit my consideration to economic aid, although one cannot ignore it, either.

"Almost $80 billion over the course of 27 years"

It's a lot of money in terms of absolute dollars. As a percentage of our budget, it's not even a rounding error. And many, many Americans feel that Israel deserves that aid. Maybe you should read about what happened to the Jews in WWII? They fought like hell to get their country, and they fight like hell every day, to keep it. Compare that to what goes in in any urban city in CT or MA, where the residents feel no sense of obligation or ownership. None.

"to say Obama isn't as supportive is like saying it hasn't rained as much in the rainforest this year. "

If you only look at money, you have a point. If you look at standing by an ally in public, I have a point. He said, in one of those moments when he didn't know the camera was on im, he lamented about Netanyahu "I have to deal with him every day", to another world leader, can't remember who it was.

"I am completely intolerant of the billions of dollars we are shipping out of this country"

One can make a compelling case about that...speaking for me, I'd rather give it to Israel than to Planned Parenthood or to ACORN.

"lost causes - that includes Pakistan, Afghanistan, Africa and Israel"

Bush saved more than one million lives in Africa, with his massive AIDS relief project called EPFAR (for which, in a fair world, they re-name the Nobel Peace Prize after him). Generations and generations of kids will be born, thanks to us. Not a lost cause in my book.

Johnny, we are so lucky to be born here. Someday, you might find yourself in a situation where you really need someone else's help. If that ever happens, I hope you find someone who's not as seemingly self-centered as you appear to be.

In my opinion, the strong have a responsibility to help the weak. Many people would passionately disagree with that.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

Israel acts the way they do because the US is their safety net.

that's interesting, I always figured they act the way they do because their neighbors are routinely threatening the extermination of their people and annihilation of their country and have sponsored terrorism and engaged in indiscriminate bombing against their country routinely.........currently, things don't appear to be improving from their stand point in the Middle East with the Arab spring empowering radicals, if they are nervous or tired of being threatened or have an itchy trigger finger...I don't really blame them...

[likwid]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

So if they develop a nuke, that wouldn't concern you?

Not everyone who says Iran is a threat, is a right-wing rdical. However, the only folks saying that we don't need to worry about Iran, are themselves radicals. Misinformed radicals.

Most folks agree that if Iran is a barbaric regime, hell-bent on enslaving as many people as possible under their thumb.

I suppose you think the queen is the supreme ruler of the UK too right?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by likwid

I suppose you think the queen is the supreme ruler of the UK too right?

As a matter of fact, I don't. Your point is?

The mullahs are in charge of Iran. They are bloodthirsty Islamic radical barbarians. Among other things, they are dedicated to the eradication of Israel.

If you aren't worried about them getting a nuke, that's your right.

[spence]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

Also, to say Obama isn't as supportive is like saying it hasn't rained as much in the rainforest this year. As I posted earlier, Obama just announced we're 'gifting' another $70million to Israel for their missile defense shield.

Election year rhetoric to exploit the reference frame of Obama the outsider who doesn't share the same values as you and me.

Be nice, I'm not sure Jim really knows any better.

I think Obama is secretly brokering a new peace deal with Egypt that will take Iran into account.

-spence

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

I think Obama is secretly brokering a new peace deal with Egypt that will take Iran into account.

-spence

hope it works out better than the Olympics

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

I think Obama is secretly brokering a new peace deal with Egypt that will take Iran into account.

-spence

That would be his SOP with everything
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[likwid]

Originally Posted by spence

Election year rhetoric to exploit the reference frame of Obama the outsider who doesn't share the same values as you and me.

Be nice, I'm not sure Jim really knows any better.

I think Obama is secretly brokering a new peace deal with Egypt that will take Iran into account.

-spence

Only a Muslim would do that!

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Election year rhetoric to exploit the reference frame of Obama the outsider who doesn't share the same values as you and me.

Be nice, I'm not sure Jim really knows any better.

I think Obama is secretly brokering a new peace deal with Egypt that will take Iran into account.

-spence

Obama is an outsider who sure as hell doesn't share my values. he pals around with Bill Ayers, and his admitted "spiritual mentor" thinks that the US Government invented AIDS to eradicate blacks.

Do those things reflect yoru values? They don't reflect mine.

You want campaign rhetoric? Who said this...

- Romney is suffering form stage-3 Romnesia
- Romney is like a Romney-hood in reverse, he want sto take from the poor and give to the rich
- Romney wants to implement the same principles that got us into this mess (Obama never said how Romney was going to re-start another subprime mortgage crisis, because Obama's worshippers, like you, don't question anything he says.

God damn right Obama's values are antithetical to my values. Everyone who disagrees with him is demonized and villified. All that liberal tolerance and open-mindedness.

I just heard today on MSNBC that John McCain is only opposed to Susan Rice as SecState, because he is - wait for it - a racist. This is the same John McCain who adopted a daughter from Bangladesh, now he's a racist. Maybe he hasn't noticed that his daughter isn't white.

Spence, as a state senator in Illinois, Obama literally supported a mom's right to kill the baby after it was born, outsid ethe womb and not connected to the mom in any way. Are those your values? Infanticide for convenience. Is that consistent with what you believe?

Saying I don't know better...who resorted to personal attacks once again, in response to getting defeated in honest discourse? Did I say one thing about Israel thatis factually incorrect? Anything?

There is nothing, not one thing, about which you "know better" than me. Except how to have a crush on a President who supports infanticide, I guess you "know better" than me about that. I can live with that.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"Almost $80 billion over the course of 27 years"

It's a lot of money in terms of absolute dollars. As a percentage of our budget, it's not even a rounding error. And many, many Americans feel that Israel deserves that aid. Maybe you should read about what happened to the Jews in WWII? They fought like hell to get their country, and they fight like hell every day, to keep it. Compare that to what goes in in any urban city in CT or MA, where the residents feel no sense of obligation or ownership. None.

"to say Obama isn't as supportive is like saying it hasn't rained as much in the rainforest this year. "

If you only look at money, you have a point. If you look at standing by an ally in public, I have a point. He said, in one of those moments when he didn't know the camera was on im, he lamented about Netanyahu "I have to deal with him every day", to another world leader, can't remember who it was.

"I am completely intolerant of the billions of dollars we are shipping out of this country"

One can make a compelling case about that...speaking for me, I'd rather give it to Israel than to Planned Parenthood or to ACORN.

"lost causes - that includes Pakistan, Afghanistan, Africa and Israel"

Bush saved more than one million lives in Africa, with his massive AIDS relief project called EPFAR (for which, in a fair world, they re-name the Nobel Peace Prize after him). Generations and generations of kids will be born, thanks to us. Not a lost cause in my book.

Johnny, we are so lucky to be born here. Someday, you might find yourself in a situation where you really need someone else's help. If that ever happens, I hope you find someone who's not as seemingly self-centered as you appear to be.

In my opinion, the strong have a responsibility to help the weak. Many people would passionately disagree with that.

While I respect your position, I'm not going to get into much of a detailed retort because we philosophically disagree and there's no changing either of our minds. But there are a couple points I'll address quickly...

Dollars spent: $3billion being a rounding error or not, it is still a significant sum of money. As you frequently point to our crippling debt, I'd expect you to be the last person to trivialize a $3 billion expenditure.

Americans' support: You comment that Americans "feel that Israel deserves that aid" couldn't have been more perfect. I say that because I'd wager most non-Jewish individuals 40 y/o and younger could not actually state *why*. I strongly believe this and believe it is a function of the government's and mainstream media's propaganda. I point to the front page headline of CNN.com earlier "Clinton: The US will unquestionably support Israel." American's constantly read "We must support Israel", "Israel is a critical ally", "the US stands behind Israel" but aside from one person, no one has been able to actually state why - because they don't actually know why.

Obama's comment: Frankly, I think the comment goes to show how much of an actual drain Israel is on the US. Going back to my "little brother" analogy, I can see Obama's comment being along the lines of "yeah, the little s#$t is at it again." There's little denying that Israel is a pain in the ass for our foreign relations department.

The Money: I'd rather not spend the money at all... for PP, ACORN, or Israel.

Bush and Africa: Yup, a lot of people in Africa didn't die of AIDS thanks to Bush's efforts. However, they then went on to die from hunger, war or some other disease. You're right that generations and generations of kids will be born... to further overpopulate a lawless continent full of barbaric people that have been killing each other for hundreds of years and will continue to do so for hundreds more. Africa is the epitome of your complaints about the US welfare class - it is impossible to help those who don't want to help themselves.

My being self-centered: Call me self-centered, but I consider it US-centered. I believe in the Libertarian philosophy: If so many American's believe that Israel deserves the aid, then stop taking my tax money and let the individual make the contribution. Our economy is on the path of failure. If we are to continue contributing towards the world economy, then a major retraction in money sent out of the US needs to occur.

While I agree that the strong have a societal obligation to 'assist' the weak, as you stated in your earlier post, Israel is anything but weak. In my exhaustion with the US funding other people's wars, the military aid needs to end.


Well... that reply was significantly longer than I intended.

[Jim in CT]

Johnny D - all the facts you state are accurate, and the conclusions you draw from them certainly make sense. As usual, there is a TON of logic to every single point you have made on this topic.

I just disagree in that, if I have to sacrifice my hard-earned money so that the Israelis can acquire military equipment that literally helps them fight off annihilation...I'm willing to make that sacrifice.

IMHO, that money is better spent than failed welfare programs that incentivize and perpetuate laziness and entitlement. I feel my money is better spent keeping Israelis alive, then giving it to 'poor' people so they can buy cigarettes, beer, smart phones, flat screen TVs, etc...

As to Africa...there is a difference between those who won't help themselves, and those who can't help themselves. I'm certain you agree with that, we likely disagree about which category most africans fall into.

Anyway...happy holidays to you and yours, it seems we both are fortunate enough to have much to be thankful for.

[scottw]

yup, tough to argue those points and the problem is that we like to spread so much money around(I think that's a quote from someone famous) that it's often funding competing interests...... diplomacy, looking back at Spence's statement about Egypt, now comes down to what our political elections here have essentially become...."do what we want or you'll lose your welfare and freebies"....sad things is that this type of "motivation" is temporary and you have to keep paying everyone to "behave"....

[detbuch]

As far as aid to Israel or Bush's Africa/aids thing, a point of view that most might agree on is the good old American capitalist analysis: cost vs. benefit and risk vs. reward.

Does giving Israel money return equal, or preferrably, greater benefits? How many billions of dollars would we have to spend developing not only military technology but other high tech products that the Israelies create and share with us versus the amount we give them. What is the risk of investing in the trade vs. the reward? Do we wish to have strong allies in the rest of the world, especially in those parts that cause us trouble and harm? Is Israel such an ally? Does it provide us with a foothold in the heart of the world that harbors enemies that wish to harm us? Does it provide intel that would be much more difficult to gather? Would providing it military aid support any military actions we might have to incur? Would the reward be greater if we didn't take the risk of assisting Israel? Would it be replaced by equally strong allies? Would the Middle East then become "pro-American"? Or is our problem with the Middle East a difference in values and principles. Is our attachment to Israel due to a sharing of those values and principles and our problem with the rest of the area a difference in those values and principles? Would our reward be greater if we abandoned our principles and espoused those of our enemies? These are some of the things to consider, there are others, no doubt. If we stick strictly to cost vs. benefit and risk vs. reward, we can agree on whether to assist Israel or not.

Bush Africa/aids thing I always considered more of a way to control the spread of aids than so-called humanitarian assistance. Of course one sort of eqauls the other. If the money actually accomplished what it intended, lessening the potentially worldwide spread of aids, then I think most would say the benefit was worth the cost, and the reward was greater than any risk.

[spence]

Bingo...

News from The Associated Press

-spence

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

Bingo...

News from The Associated Press

-spence

deja vu all over again Nostradamus.... you would appear to be applauding the Muslim Brotherhood and expansion of their dominance and influence.....Bingo!


CBS- Riding high on U.S. and international praise for mediating a Gaza cease-fire, Mohammed Morsi put himself above oversight and gave protection to the Islamist-led assembly writing a new constitution from a looming threat of dissolution by court order.

But the move is likely to fuel growing public anger that he and his Muslim Brotherhood are seizing too much power.


Nov 23,
Rallies for, against Egypt president's new powers

CAIRO (AP) -- Demonstrators for and against sweeping new powers assumed by Egypt's Islamist president are gathering in different parts of Cairo, a clear show of the deep polarization plaguing the country.

President Mohammed Morsi's decree puts himself above the judiciary and also exempts the Islamist-dominated constituent assembly writing Egypt's new constitution from judicial review. Liberal and secular members earlier walked out of the body, charging it would impose strict Islamic practices.

..Mursi draws fire with new Egypt decree
By Marwa Awad | Reuters – 15 hours ago..

Presented as a move to "protect the revolution", the decree won immediate praise from Mursi's allies but stoked fears among secular-minded Egyptians that the Muslim Brotherhood and its allies aim to dominate the new Egypt.

Leading liberal politician Mohamed ElBaradei, writing on his Twitter account, said Mursi had "usurped all state powers and appointed himself Egypt's new pharaoh".


Nov 22,

Egypt Brotherhood leader blasts peace with Israel

CAIRO(AP) -- The top leader of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood denounced peace efforts with Israel and urged holy war to liberate Palestinian territories on Thursday - one day after the country's president, who hails from the movement, mediated a cease-fire between Israelis and Palestinians to end eight days of fierce fighting.

"The enemy knows nothing but the language of force," said Mohammed Badie. "Be aware of the game of grand deception with which they depict peace accords," he said in a statement carried on the group's website and emailed to reporters.

Nov. 16th
Arriving in Gaza Friday, Prime Minister Kandil pledged his country’s support for the Palestinian people. He called for a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital, according to the Times of Israel:

“Egypt after the revolution will work toward an extended calm, and afterwards for the establishment of a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital. That is the only way to achieve stability in the region,” says Kandil.

The Egyptian prime minister urged all Palestinian factions to unite. “The strength of the Palestinan people lies in its unity. That is the way to achieve victory,” he says.