Customer Discussions > History forum

Can liberal American Jews still support Modern Israel? - the country has changed and is not what you think it is anymore.


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 201-225 of 938 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Nov 23, 2011 9:05:14 AM PST
Skriker says:
"how many non-combatants were killed in any city street battle in WW2?
Or probably in places like Hue in Vietnam."

No doubt many, but just because it happened in the past in no way means I have to like that it happened now or then. As such I am free to have an opinion on the point as well.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 23, 2011 9:07:01 AM PST
jeffesq613 says:
No one likes to see innocent people killed, but sometimes there's no other choice. What do you propose the Israelis do with terrorist who hide themselves and their guns in the middle of civilian populations? Throw up their hands and say, "Oh well, I guess there's nothing we can do"?

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 23, 2011 9:10:06 AM PST
Skriker says:
"Incidentally, likewise, if ur going to have vehicular transport, there is similiarly always going to be transport accidents and a life-toll.
If you say that it is unacceptable for one person or thouands to be killed by cars, trucks, buses and planes...ok, now what?
Continuing implies some level of tolerance."

Sorry but civilian transport is not the same as dropping military ordinance on targets. I do agree that many people are killed by cars, trucks, buses and planes every day. I also believe that something should be done to really punish people who live like idiots, shave and apply makeup when they drive, send emails on their laptop in the passenger seat while driving, texting, driving while drunk, etc, etc. It is also not an all or nothing equation.

"If they are cut down either deliberately or accidentally, there is a propaganda windfall especially in Western public opinion."

And like I said until the honest citizens on each side stand up and make their leaders settle with peace it won't happen. I can't make palestinian civilians stand up to their leaders. That is completely out of my power, but I do believe they are foolish to keep allowing themselves to be led and used that way.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 23, 2011 9:15:43 AM PST
Skriker says:
"No, you just keep changing what you've said before. If you want to admit that what you said before was wrong or was not what you meant, that's fine."

No Jeff if you read where I actually specifically go back to my words, *you* are reading meaning into things that are not there. I cannot be held accountable for your own assumptions about how my position is anything but abject support for the Palestinians when it is most definitely not. I *KNOW* what my position is. You obviously don't. You called me out on discernment leading to wisdom. A bit of reading comprehension would help you.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 23, 2011 9:18:18 AM PST
Lorne Temes says:
Research Bruno Bettelheim too; his integrity as psychologist and reporter are both now questionable.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 23, 2011 9:25:44 AM PST
Skriker says:
"What does "neither gets to claim that moral high ground" mean if not that they are both equally guilty, both as bad as the other? Can you at least see that that is how most people read such words of moral equivalence?"

Yes I can see that, but even when I try to clarify the point you keep harping back on that statement. I see the moral "high" ground being held for those who have not done anything negative with respect to the issue I am talking about. Since Israel has killed innocent civilians and I don't like innocent civilians being killed I don't consider them capable of being on the moral "high" ground on the subject. Again it is a matter of degrees. No where did I say specifically and in detail: Israeli's killing innocent people through collatoral damage is EXACTLY THE SAME as a palestinian blowing up a bus full of people. No where did I say that, but that is the immediate assumption people made on my comments. Instead of trying to get any clarification I was immediately lumped in with the palestinian sympathizers.

On the moral scale the palestinians can't claim the moral high ground either. The actions of the idiots who strap on bombs are reprehensible. There I spelled it out in detail. Is it clear to you now what my position is on the palestinians?

All I said is that palestinians killing innocents in no way *excuses* innocent palestinians being killed in retribution attacks nor does it erase it. That is my whole point all along, but you seem incapable of even trying to comprehend that.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 23, 2011 9:31:41 AM PST
jeffesq613 says:
Perhaps you're taking this too personally. I am involved in these types of debates on several threads, and the kind of verbiage that you use is most often used by pro-Palestinians to make the point that the pro-Israel side has no right to complain about Palestinian terror because Israel kills a lot of innocent people, too. Saying things like that is dishonest. Israel is trying to get these terrorists to stop. It cannot just ignore these terrorists because they choose to hide themselves in areas where they know that innocent Palestinians will be killed if Israel fights back.

To compare the morality of collateral damage to the morality of deliberate murder of innocents is wrong, and you should be careful not to allow your words to let people believe you are doing so, IMHO.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 23, 2011 9:42:56 AM PST
Skriker says:
"No one likes to see innocent people killed, but sometimes there's no other choice. What do you propose the Israelis do with terrorist who hide themselves and their guns in the middle of civilian populations? Throw up their hands and say, "Oh well, I guess there's nothing we can do"?"

No I don't. In fact I'm not even telling them to stop which is the funny part about all of this. I just got bothered by the palestinians being villanized so strongly for killing innocent people when the Israelis have done some of that too. The position I responded to came across as "Israel is better than them because *they* have killed innocent people." I just tried to point out that the situation wasn't as absolute as all that.

I also believe it is too easy to push a button to launch a missile from ground or air platforms to kill people without the direct up close and personal look at exactly what affect that ordinance has had. The boots on the ground are the ones who have to see the results and feel personally responsible if they kill someone's grandmother in a raid somewhere. The more impersinal these kinds of things get the easier it is to continue with them. The reason that Israel gets so angry when bombings happen is because it is *very* personal to everyone at the scene. They all see it happen and suffer from the after effects of it. The same happens in palestinian communities too when a missile hits there. The people on the ground are directly affected and get angry.

I really can't understand why, the common every day palestinian citizen puts up with it. Their radical leaders. The continued attacks. The continued vitrole against Israel. When does it end and when do they get to just live their lives? Unfortunately everything that Israel feels it has to do to try and stop attacks on the jewish population helps keep these negative feelings alive. It is most definitely a chicken and egg type situation. Each side has to give, but neither side wants to be first, but they won't get together and do it simultaneously. The idea about peace talks is to work out your differences, not avoid them until everything is resolved *first*. :\

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 23, 2011 9:44:12 AM PST
Skriker says:
"Perhaps you're taking this too personally. I am involved in these types of debates on several threads, and the kind of verbiage that you use is most often used by pro-Palestinians to make the point that the pro-Israel side has no right to complain about Palestinian terror because Israel kills a lot of innocent people, too. Saying things like that is dishonest. Israel is trying to get these terrorists to stop. It cannot just ignore these terrorists because they choose to hide themselves in areas where they know that innocent Palestinians will be killed if Israel fights back.

To compare the morality of collateral damage to the morality of deliberate murder of innocents is wrong, and you should be careful not to allow your words to let people believe you are doing so, IMHO."

Mea Culpa for not expressing my opinions clearly then. I now understand your point. :)

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 23, 2011 10:31:10 AM PST
jeffesq613 says:
What have the Palestinians ever done that convinces you that there is any peace deal they would be willing to accept? Yet, again your condemnation for the failure to achieve peace remains "even-handed".

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 23, 2011 10:32:06 AM PST
jeffesq613 says:
Thank you, and I apologize if I spoke too harshly to you in my assumption that you were saying something you did not mean to say.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 23, 2011 10:43:47 AM PST
" Perhaps if you actually tried to understand my position"

Why bother? We've all heard this stuff, hundreds of times. And it's always from a person who assumes that they are the professor, and not the student. And this self-appointed professor is always more ignorant than the people that they are trying to lecture.

You are the one, who refuses to understand positions, here.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 23, 2011 11:30:26 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 23, 2011 1:23:15 PM PST
Rachel says:
iscah:

Another one with whom we have to start from point zero and build up so he learns.

No way. It is tiring and that is why I have enough to try to regurgitate this all over again.
He can shriek all over and that is not a show of understanding.

I have read all and to me it is no worth the answers.

Rachel

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 23, 2011 1:20:58 PM PST
Rachel,

I know. It's so tiresome. This discussion ended, quite awhile ago. But the guy won't stop shrieking.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 23, 2011 2:14:03 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 23, 2011 2:14:32 PM PST
patrick says:
No, noones telling you that you have to like unfortunate and unpleasant things such as when terrible and violent things happen to apparently innocent people.
I produce those other examples for two reasons.
Past comparable examples...who has previously managed at all to fight any city street battle without skittling non-combatants living or moving in the area?
Noone, not then, not since.
Secondly...look at the telephone numbers of such persons killed in those past urban street/house battles.
Look at even the alleged total death toll in Gaza.
1400 persons across 2 or 3 weeks fighting, the most powerful military in that region fighting in a densely populated urban environment, where the irregular insurgent force is also actively using their own civilians and civilian infrastructure also, as a part of their whole battle plan.
1400 persons killed, of all kinds, we will of course never even know who was a fighter and who wasnt, or who was 'in between"... a civilian actively supportng and assisting the combatants and putting themselves in harm's way instead of just fleeing and keeping their ehads down.
1400 persons.

the Syrians have killed twice that many in crowd control during the instability there, not an all-out showdown war.
If anything, it is evidence of RoE and restraint by the Israelis.
I can assure you that if any powerful regular army went through there in SS Waffen mode, there would be one hell of a lot more plastic bags than 1400.

Throw in Manilla, to my past examples given, btw.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 23, 2011 6:01:24 PM PST
jeffesq613 says:
Give him a break. I think I've made progress with him, and I think we understand each other.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 23, 2011 6:04:08 PM PST
<Can liberal American Jews still support Modern Israel?>

By voting as a reliable dem bloc, they reject Israel. They obviously don't support Israel.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 23, 2011 8:20:01 PM PST
patrick says:
i have seen the same phenomenom with some women I dated...it ended some time ago but they cant stop shrieking...

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 23, 2011 8:23:31 PM PST
Rachel says:
patrick:

Happy Thanksgiving.

Rachel

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 24, 2011 1:40:12 AM PST
patrick says:
no thanksgiving in Australia, Rachel...

I know that Canada also has one, on a different date, but something familiar to us only from decades of US tv and movies...

We're not thankful, just relieved.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 24, 2011 10:04:21 AM PST
anne says:
lol

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 24, 2011 4:15:38 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 24, 2011 4:17:47 PM PST
Rachel says:
patrick:

Yea! I forgot where you live. but good wishes are always welcome. Enjoy life.
Another annie gem................... Very appropriate comment.
Saying she doesn't vote. Ahem. Will see.
Rachel:-)

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 25, 2011 3:05:49 AM PST
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_QDGdbg-QQ

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 28, 2011 7:42:59 AM PST
Skriker says:
Thanks Jeff, I am trying to "get it". ;)

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 28, 2011 7:45:21 AM PST
Skriker says:
So sorry that "you've heard it all before", KNYN. So that makes it OK to treat people poorly and not share what you've heard before? OK...
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the History forum

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  History forum
Participants:  52
Total posts:  938
Initial post:  Nov 13, 2011
Latest post:  Dec 21, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 1 customer

Search Customer Discussions