Muslim murders entire Jewish family!

[Bob]

Lest one forget, Gaza could, at any time, request true peace with Israel, request ambassadorial and commercial exchange, reduce armaments to that necessary to maintain domestic tranquility, and start seeking out productive, peaceable economic activities.

With a bit of financial help from other wealthy Arab countries it could probably desalinate water and sell it to Israel for hard currency. But no, plotting to blow up buses and asking for U.N. aid in the process is more lucrative. For the leader's Swiss bank accounts, that is.

It's one of the tragedies of this conflict. All that lost potential. You know, Gaza has beautiful beaches and could've become a tourist hub. Ah well, I'm not naive or ignorant enough to think it'll ever happen. Things will only get worse...

[Jonsa]

Anyone with an ounce of knowledge about armored warfare knows that you fight mechanized battles from the bottom of your fuel tank, not the top. Every mile your tank is riding its treds rather than the carrier it came on is a huge factor. Not just in fuel use, either...but breakdowns and such. So yeah...a 'couple of miles' (or so) counts.

Yes anyone with an ounce of knowledge about armoured warfare knows that open terrain is preferable to urban environments.

Save a few gallons to slowly maneoveur down streets or give it gas across open terrain. Hmmmmmm.

[Jonsa]

I addressed this just a moment ago. Certainly Gaza isn't completely sovereign or occupied, but it is much much much closer to sovereignty than to occupation. And yes, Gaza controls its side of its borders. Just as Canada controls what happens on our side of the border with the USA. The restrictions placed on Gaza by Israel via the transfer of goods and people across its shared border with Israel, and its sea border do not constitute an occupation. Neither does control of its airspace.

Well then I guess the UN's international law department is simply wrong. Who knew you knew more than they knew.

What about the other half of the Israeli Jewish population that isn't European? Why did you even mention "European"? Would things have been different if the early Zionist pioneers were primarily from Morocco or Argentina? You and I both know why you mentioned that. The countries from which the Jews in modern Israel returned (from all over the world), is completely irrelevant.

Well, I mentioned Euro jews specifically because they were the predominant kind of jews coming into palestine. If they were from morocco or iraq or iran or lebannon then they would have been a tad more culturally sensitive to the arabs and more than likely spoke arabic and it might have been a slightly different story. As it was, to the arabs the jewish influx were a bunch of land hungry foreigners,

Yes, I agree its irrelevant. Seems you see an antisemite around every corner.

What do you mean? The 1947 Partition Plan was accepted by us. Even though yes, it was unworkable from a security perspective.

Oh please. we both know that Jewish acceptance was a political ploy to force the arab's hand. Perhaps you should read a little more history.

No, I don't expect that from them. In fact, I expect an eternal rejection from Arabs that this is our land and always will be. I know them very well. You also seem to be indicating that you recognize the irreconcilability of this conflict. If that is your perspective, we're in agreement.

I don't expect eternal rejection nor do I think that the conflict is irreconcilable.

No, it's a heavy price. Considering that you don't know what the price is, and never made any payments towards this price, it's quite arrogant of you to be telling us what's a steep price. Was it worth it and does it continue to be worth it? Yes. But centuries of persecution, millions of murdered and oppressed martyrs, and all of the modern history of the Jewish people intertwined with Israel is certainly not a small price. Take a walk through any of Israel's military cemeteries and tell us it's a small price to pay for independence, freedom, and self-determination.

Yes its a small price and I'm not being arrogant in the least. Study history and compare. Over the 53 years of the conflict, you have lost .003% of your population to war and terrorism which is 1 thousand times less than what the whole world lost in WW2 in 5 years.

Whatever. People who use meaningless terms like "international opinion" and "international law" never really know what they're talking about. What's next, the "international community"?

Yes, international opinion is meaningless. However, your arrogant dismissal indicates a level of ignorance of realpolitik. You enjoy the patronage of the only superpower. Should they determine that it is in their best interests (not yours) that International Law must be followed, you'd be basically up shit's creek.

[DogOnPorch]

Yes anyone with an ounce of knowledge about armoured warfare knows that open terrain is preferable to urban environments.

Save a few gallons to slowly maneoveur down streets or give it gas across open terrain. Hmmmmmm.

Gaza isn't 100% urban by any stretch.

[Bob]

You continue to talk about the price Israel and the Jewish people have paid and continue to pay for our independence. You think the price is only calculated in blood (of which the price is already very high, but a necessity towards preserving our rights). Consider the fact that every drafted young man gives three years of his prime to the army, basically becomes an economic liability rather than a tax-paying economic asset, while every young girl does the same only for two years. The consider the fact that these are working years, not childhood or retirement years. Assuming that the average working Israeli is gainfully employed for about 45 years, we're losing about 6.5% and 4.5% of our youth's productive years, where they become economic liabilities. This doesn't even touch on the incalculable costs of the stress and pain involved with many soldiers' duties.

See, this is the kinda thing you can only learn from talking to someone who's actually thought about these things.

Bear in mind, this is one of several costs you haven't considered. I'd indicate more, but I just don't have the energy to explain it all to you, at the moment.

As far as the population of Israel, the Jews who came from Arab/Muslim lands tend to vote more right-wing than the Jews with European heritage, primarily because they lived under Arab/Muslim subjugation and feel little love lost for people who, generally speaking, oppressed us. You and I both know why you stated "European Jews", and I'll leave it at that. What you don't know, however, is that the majority of Israel's Jewish population is not of European heritage. Again, the heritage and origins of Israel's Jewish population is completely irrelevant.

[Bob]

With respect to the status of Gaza, re: occupied vs. sovereign, I've already explained that it is much more sovereign than it is occupied. Your pathetic attempt to wash that away with some sarcastic comment about some imagined "international law department" at the UN doesn't change anything. "International Law", especially with respect to Israel, is 100% politicized. Considering that Gaza and the West Bank are quite different animals, how can they both be "occupied"? At the very least, you must concede that there is a lot of wiggle room with respect to the definition of "occupied", considering how this label is applied to such different scenarios.

Again, in any honest analysis, Gaza isn't occupied. A few components of occupation does not make a full-occupation. And at the end of the day, the security measures on Gaza are entirely necessarily and wholly justifiable. If anything, they are not nearly strict enough considering that the terrorism from Gaza hasn't ceased.

[DogOnPorch]

Yes, international opinion is meaningless. However, your arrogant dismissal indicates a level of ignorance of realpolitik. You enjoy the patronage of the only superpower. Should they determine that it is in their best interests (not yours) that International Law must be followed, you'd be basically up shit's creek.

Maybe...maybe not. Israel has done without America's help in the past.

[Bob]

Maybe...maybe not. Israel has done without America's help in the past.

One more thing I didn't mention to Jonsa, with respect to his comment about Israel receiving the patronage of the USA completely ignores America's patronage of the Palestinians, as well as their Arab/Muslim allies. Beyond that, they have historically received significant aid from the former Soviet Union as currently from Russia, Iran, Syria, and other such states. Contemporarily, the Palestinians receive massive funding from the EU and Arab states (directly and also indirectly through organizations like the UN and its subsidiaries). I know I'm not telling you anything you don't already know, but perhaps Jonsa would like to learn a thing or two.

Let's not forget that the Palestinians have been the largest per-capita recipients of foreign aid in the world, and have been for many years. Moreover, they don't deserve it. Many other countries actually have real problems not caused exclusively by their own faults, and have much more legitimate needs for the money. Moreover, many other countries deserve more trust with such funds.

[Jonsa]

You continue to talk about the price Israel and the Jewish people have paid and continue to pay for our independence. You think the price is only calculated in blood (of which the price is already very high, but a necessity towards preserving our rights). Consider the fact that every drafted young man gives three years of his prime to the army, basically becomes an economic liability rather than a tax-paying economic asset, while every young girl does the same only for two years. The consider the fact that these are working years, not childhood or retirement years. Assuming that the average working Israeli is gainfully employed for about 45 years, we're losing about 6.5% and 4.5% of our youth's productive years, where they become economic liabilities. This doesn't even touch on the incalculable costs of the stress and pain involved with many soldiers' duties.

See, this is the kinda thing you can only learn from talking to someone who's actually thought about these things.

NONSENSE! Those young people come out of the army with training, discipline and skills. That isn't a liability, that is one helluva a national asset! And they are most certainly NOT an economic liability. Or perhaps the size of your military/industrial/security sector has escaped you.

Pain and stress are part of a soldier's burden.

Bear in mind, this is one of several costs you haven't considered. I'd indicate more, but I just don't have the energy to explain it all to you, at the moment.

I am always interested in learning more. Perhaps when you have more energy you can outline some of these other costs I certainly havent' given any consideration too.

As far as the population of Israel, the Jews who came from Arab/Muslim lands tend to vote more right-wing than the Jews with European heritage, primarily because they lived under Arab/Muslim subjugation and feel little love lost for people who, generally speaking, oppressed us. You and I both know why you stated "European Jews", and I'll leave it at that. What you don't know, however, is that the majority of Israel's Jewish population is not of European heritage. Again, the heritage and origins of Israel's Jewish population is completely irrelevant.

I was making a point that back in the 1920's to 1948, way back then, the majority of jewish immigrants were from Europe and as such certainly were culturally insensitive to the arabs they found there. The vast majority didn't speak arab. Do you have some kind of mental block where you can't actually understand context?

Now, this is the second time you sleazily implied I am an anti-semite.

I'll say this once:

I am the grandson and son of GERMAN jews. My Grandfather was lucky and got out of Berlin in 1938 and unlucky enough to move to London. Yes, my father's family were enemy aliens living in London during the blitz. The entire rest of my father's family was sent to the camps and NONE (37 souls) came out alive. Two of my cousins in the IDF died in 72. I could go on, but I just don't have the energy. I know some of that pain, so fuck you.

[Jonsa]

Maybe...maybe not. Israel has done without America's help in the past.

Not for long.

They would have been toast in 73.

And these days the enemy has billions and billions and billions that they have spend on weapons. A different planet than it was then.

Edited March 30, 2011 by Jonsa

[Jonsa]

One more thing I didn't mention to Jonsa, with respect to his comment about Israel receiving the patronage of the USA completely ignores America's patronage of the Palestinians, as well as their Arab/Muslim allies. Beyond that, they have historically received significant aid from the former Soviet Union as currently from Russia, Iran, Syria, and other such states. Contemporarily, the Palestinians receive massive funding from the EU and Arab states (directly and also indirectly through organizations like the UN and its subsidiaries). I know I'm not telling you anything you don't already know, but perhaps Jonsa would like to learn a thing or two.

Where you born this way or do you just try hard.

I maintained that if the US determined it was in their best interest to have Israel follow international law, then Israel would be in a world of trouble.

You dont' respond to the point made, you automatically reply with "yeah but the palestinians....".

It is not relevant that the palestinians get aid from the US and a bunch of other countries. I am well aware of the soviet involvement - too bad in 67 you might have taken cairo. I wasn't talking about the palestinians at all.

Let's not forget that the Palestinians have been the largest per-capita recipients of foreign aid in the world, and have been for many years. Moreover, they don't deserve it. Many other countries actually have real problems not caused exclusively by their own faults, and have much more legitimate needs for the money. Moreover, many other countries deserve more trust with such funds.

Why would we forget that? Again not germane to my original point.

However, It stems from their unique "refugee" status and their non existent national status. Deserved or not, they get it. Arafat was the biggest gonif.

[Saipan]

Well then I guess the UN's international law department is simply wrong.

90% of the time.

Problem is many members are dictatorships. Trying to dictate Democratic country.

[Jonsa]

With respect to the status of Gaza, re: occupied vs. sovereign, I've already explained that it is much more sovereign than it is occupied. Your pathetic attempt to wash that away with some sarcastic comment about some imagined "international law department" at the UN doesn't change anything. "International Law", especially with respect to Israel, is 100% politicized. Considering that Gaza and the West Bank are quite different animals, how can they both be "occupied"? At the very least, you must concede that there is a lot of wiggle room with respect to the definition of "occupied", considering how this label is applied to such different scenarios.

Again, in any honest analysis, Gaza isn't occupied. A few components of occupation does not make a full-occupation. And at the end of the day, the security measures on Gaza are entirely necessarily and wholly justifiable. If anything, they are not nearly strict enough considering that the terrorism from Gaza hasn't ceased.

So now gaza is only "partly occupied". Like Dread Pirate Roberts was only "partly dead". Okay

So the Hague and Geneva Conventions are politicized. I think you might mean the interpretation is politicized.

Perhaps you should actually learn exactly what the Israeli Supreme Court thinks of International law.

Edited March 30, 2011 by Jonsa

[DogOnPorch]

Not for long.

They would have been toast in 72.

Well, the Arabs wouldn't have been able to attack without Soviet largesse...especially the SAM missiles...but not to mention the jets, tanks and exotic weapons (for the time), etc...and the Yom Kippur War was in 1973.

Plus...the Israelis have invested heavily in making their own 'in house' weapons.

And these days the enemy has billions and billions and billions that they have spend on weapons. A different planet than it was then.

Billions upon billions of rubles were spent on arming the Arabs back in the 20th century, too. Different planet? Different day, only. Not so many free weapons flowing from Russia being the big change in their ability to wage war. Most Arab armies are quite out-of-date...still soldiering along with old Cold War era gear for the bulk of their forces. Which is why major conflict has been avoided for so long, as slaughter would ensue.

Edited March 30, 2011 by DogOnPorch

[bloodyminded]

Now, this is the second time you sleazily implied I am an anti-semite.

It's a cherished component of the rhetorical arsenal.

I'll say this once:

I am the grandson and son of GERMAN jews. My Grandfather was lucky and got out of Berlin in 1938 and unlucky enough to move to London. Yes, my father's family were enemy aliens living in London during the blitz. The entire rest of my father's family was sent to the camps and NONE (37 souls) came out alive. Two of my cousins in the IDF died in 72. I could go on, but I just don't have the energy. I know some of that pain, so fuck you.

Bob's gone over this sort of issue as well, and delineated the phenomenon of Jews who are essentially goyim wannabes.

In the course of these discussions, he attempted to parse out the distinctions between Good Jew and Bad Jew--a formulation with, historically, a rather unpalatable pedigree, and which makes me surprised anyone would wish to resurrect it.

I think we now see which camp you belong to, Jonsa.

Edited March 30, 2011 by bloodyminded

[Jonsa]

Well, the Arabs wouldn't have been able to attack without Soviet largesse...especially the SAM missiles...but not to mention the jets, tanks and exotic weapons (for the time), etc...and the Yom Kippur War was in 1973.

Plus...the Israelis have invested heavily in making their own 'in house' weapons.

Billions upon billions of rubles were spent on arming the Arabs back in the 20th century, too. Different planet? Different day, only. Not so many free weapons flowing from Russia being the big change in their ability to wage war. Most Arab armies are quite out-of-date...still soldiering along with old Cold War era gear for the bulk of their forces. Which is why major conflict has been avoided for so long, as slaughter would ensue.

Another one that when making a comment about Israel immediately moves into "yeah but the palestinians...."

Yes, Israeli military expenditures are about $14.5Billion, including the $3 billion US aid or roughly 7% of GDP,

Saudi Arabia spends about $40Billion or 8.2% of GDP. Hell the UAE spends $13 billion or 5.9%. That ain't chicken feed, especially when the main supplier to all is the US and all their wonderful gadgets and doodahs.

I do agree that the surrounding arab countries have aging inferior equipment and poorly trained soldiers.

You say different day, I say different planet.

I assume Lebannon taught the IDF a few lessons about the the latest war making innovations.

[Oleg Bach]

To me, the Bible is just another collection of myths...just like Zeus & crew. And like all myths, there are very worldly reasons for them...just like why cows are sacred in India. It's a major area of study in anthropology. That you and Gosthacked find anthropology, archeology, sociology, et al, to be unimportant in terms of Israel and the Jews isn't my problem.

The old testiment is just a record of poor behaviour by the ancient Jews...and for some reason they are proud of the record of nothing less than aggressive barbarism...The New Testiment - is actually a factual record concerning a great reformist call Jesus...who attempted to civlize these people who thought that killing someones husband so you could have sex with his wife was some how noble.

[DogOnPorch]

I assume Lebannon taught the IDF a few lessons about the the latest war making innovations.

As well as fighting Hamas in Gaza...Iron Dome and Trophy being the latest 'lessons' learned.

Another one that when making a comment about Israel immediately moves into "yeah but the palestinians...."

I haven't much sympathy for Islamic terrorist groups with National Socialist leanings. Does it show??

[Saipan]

Yes, Israeli military expenditures are about $14.5Billion, including the $3 billion US aid or roughly 7% of GDP

I'd say not enough, since their very EXISTENCE depends on it.

[Saipan]

the ancient Jews...and for some reason they are proud of the record of nothing less than aggressive barbarism...

They very much advanced the last 2000 years. While Islamists are still there.

In Russia some people lived in zemliankas (hole in the ground) mere 100 years ago.

[DogOnPorch]

They very much advanced the last 2000 years. While Islamists are still there.

In Russia some people lived in zemliankas (hole in the ground) mere 100 years ago.

Soviet partisans used zemliankas on a large scale during WW2. Germans would walk right over then unawares.

[Rue]

...The old testiment(sic) is just a record of poor behaviour by the ancient Jews...and for some reason they are proud of the record of nothing less than aggressive barbarism.

..The New Testiment - is actually a factual record concerning a great reformist call Jesus...who attempted to civlize these people who thought that killing someones husband so you could have sex with his wife was some how noble.

How you came to the conclusion these re-edited manuscripts in either testament are record of anything leta lone the new ones are factual is interesting.

The negative generalization that all ancient Jews were proud of engaging in murder, adultery, and all kinds of other poo poo ka ka behaviour is a;so interesting.

Seems to me Oleg you just can't shed yourself of your own Easter European Christian Orthodoxy biases.

The stories in the New Testament weer re-written by Constantine's stooges deliberately to assimilate pagan rituals and beliefs into the Christian ones to prevent a civil war.

Deviations and distortions of what was written were caused by editsfrom the orginal writings and/or the missed translations from Armaic to Hebrew to Greek to Roman and so on.

But I love your thesis Oleg. Yes I know. Jew = heathen. Christian = enlightened.

Right Oleg. Or should I say Father Oleg now.

Thanks Bwana. Thankls for coming to try proseltyze me and lift me from my state of infidelity.

Here's a hint Oleg, there are some barbaric things in the New Testament.

Edited March 30, 2011 by Rue

[Bob]

It's a cherished component of the rhetorical arsenal.

Bob's gone over this sort of issue as well, and delineated the phenomenon of Jews who are essentially goyim wannabes.

In the course of these discussions, he attempted to parse out the distinctions between Good Jew and Bad Jew--a formulation with, historically, a rather unpalatable pedigree, and which makes me surprised anyone would wish to resurrect it.

I think we now see which camp you belong to, Jonsa.

It's important to read what Jonsa writes, as well as what he doesn't write. I think it's quite clear that he does not identify himself as a Jewish person. He's the "son of Jews", but not Jewish himself. Unless it was just a strange way of him identifying himself, I think much was revealed about him through his post to which you responded.

I've met a lot of people like that, who either actively reject Judaism by clearly defining that their Judaism ends with their heritage, or are hesitant for one reason of another to acknowledge their Judaism by carefully grading it with a preface like, "I'm the son of Jews".

And where did I call Jonsa anti-Semitic?

So here's a question for you, Jonsa, are you Jewish?

[Jonsa]

It's important to read what Jonsa writes, as well as what he doesn't write. I think it's quite clear that he does not identify himself as a Jewish person. He's the "son of Jews", but not Jewish himself. Unless it was just a strange way of him identifying himself, I think much was revealed about him through his post to which you responded.

I've met a lot of people like that, who either actively reject Judaism by clearly defining that their Judaism ends with their heritage, or are hesitant for one reason of another to acknowledge their Judaism by carefully grading it with a preface like, "I'm the son of Jews".

And where did I call Jonsa anti-Semitic?

So here's a question for you, Jonsa, are you Jewish?

I am an Canadian atheist of German/Welsh descent.

[Bonam]

I am an Canadian atheist of German/Welsh descent.

Yet you also said this:

I am the grandson and son of GERMAN jews.

Being an atheist doesn't make you not a Jew. It is more a matter of descent. To the Nazis, being a son of Jews would have been enough to have you gassed. To anti-semites, being the son of Jews is enough for you to be hated. And to Israel, being the son of Jews is enough for you to qualify for the right of return as a Jew. Now, you may choose not to self-identify as a Jew, but you can't get away from being what you are. Politically incorrect as the notion may seem, anyone who cares to notice such things can probably tell just by your nose.