Israel

The Battered Israeli Anti-War Movement

|

Lonely Peaceniks
Credit: delayed gratification / Foter

As the latest war between Israel and Hamas continues to rage on and rising Palestinian civilian body counts leave Israel further isolated from the international community, one wonders: What happened to Israel's anti-war movement?

Despite being at war for nearly its entire existence, there has always been a robust peace movement in Israel. But this time around, the doves are the fringe in Israeli society. Last Saturday in Tel Aviv, the largest anti-war protest since the latest battle began was attended by a few thousand people (estimates vary from 1,000 to 5,000) and a recent poll shows 87 percent of Jewish Israelis support continuing the siege on Gaza.

In a small nation with compulsory military service, where every single miltary casualty is national news, and the country's political class is willing to trade thousands of Palestinian prisoners for a single Israeli soldier (and sometimes for the bodies of fallen soldiers), it is no small thing to loudly advocate against war. Accusations ranging from dangerous naivite to being a self-hating Jew to aiding the enemy are common.

As Marina Strinkovsky wrote in the New Statesman

Protest is one thing, but the angry recriminations of loved ones—that is something I admit is beyond the scope of my bravery. In my life, I have faced potatoes lobbed at me from upper floors by small children on demonstrations and anguished accusations of indifference to my family's safety. I know which hurt more.

Harriet Sherwood of The Guardian adds:

It is a big contrast with the 400,000 people—then almost a tenth of the country's population – who took to the streets in 1986 to protest about Israel's war in Lebanon. In 1995, 100,000 people attended the rally in support of the Oslo accords at which prime minister Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated. And in 2009 several thousand people joined peace marches during Operation Cast Lead, Israel's three-week assault on Gaza….

The reasons for the decline of Israel's peace movement are, inevitably, complex and interrelated. They include the failures of the Oslo accords and of successive attempts to forge a peace deal; the growing voice of the extreme right in Israeli politics; the "normalisation" of the 47-year-long occupation; and the relative marginalisation of the Palestinian cause both in Israel and internationally.

Added to that mix is weariness and hopelessness. "I think the peace movement became frustrated that nothing changes," said Maayan Dak of the Women's Coalition for Peace. "Things just repeat. People feel there is no point."

Beyond failed diplomacy and a generations-long occupation, the collapse of the Israeli anti-war movement can also be attributed to the dread felt by Israelis over rockets that have reached further into their cities than ever before and the discovery of sophisticated tunnels that go deep into their country. If the polls are to believed and the sparsely attended protests are any indication, the Israeli populace is far more concerned with temporary security than permanent peace.

Few would argue against Israel's right to defend itself against attacks from Hamas, whose unwillingness to ever recognize Israel is well documented, but talk of a lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians pretty much died last month (along with John Kerry's Nobel Peace Prize ambitions), when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told reporters he would never allow for a fully soveriegn Palestinian state in the West Bank. While not explicitly rejecting a two-state solution, Netanyahu reiterated the popular opinion among Israelis that the country's unilateral 2005 pullout from the Gaza Strip created the conditions that led to the current war with Hamas and that he would never allow for such a security vacuum to exist in the West Bank. 

Israel's security concerns aside, no one in the Palestinian political camp, even Israel's on-again, off-again negotiating partner, Fatah, would ever agree to Israeli police and military patrolling inside a nominally sovereign Palestinian state. Thus, the status quo of Israeli occupation over the West Bank, a near-total blockade of the Gaza Strip, and brief wars every few years that leave both sides further hardended, will be kept in place.

When the latest fighting goes into "cease-fire" mode (not to be confused with peace) Israelis will once again be at a crossroads. Will they have made their point by destroying a few dozen tunnels and leveling much of Gaza's infrastructure? Will they follow the lead of their late ex-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon (no dove by any stretch of the imagination) and make tough concessions including dismantling illegal settlments and negotiating directly with the people they've fought for decades?

The answer is unlikely, unless a lasting peace is as much of a priority as temporary security.

NEXT: Edward Snowden's Asylum About to Expire

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “The reasons for the decline of Israel’s peace movement are, inevitably, complex and interrelated.”

    It probably has something to do with the 8000 rockets that have been launched at them over the last few months.

    1. along with John Kerry’s Nobel Peace Prize ambitions

      Pretty sure they would have just given Obama another one.

      1. Why did i post this in reply to Anon Mouse?

        This:

        http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg……34af28.jpg

      2. Well, it’s not a sure thing that Obama would have received a 2nd. Has Hillary gotten one yet? Isn’t it her turn? I mean, Obama already jumped out of line and stole Hillary’s turn at POTUS. Why can’t we all just play nice by the rules that … they … decided on.

    2. NO! It can’t be that!

      I mean, really, just imagine that say, you live in a little country named Vermont. And you are totally surrounded by countries that totally hate your guts and wish you didn’t exist, because let’s say, your religion is different than theirs and your invisible sky gods and their invisible sky gods just can’t seem to see eye to eye on things.

      So, not only do all of your neighbors hate you, but they sometimes actually decide to attack you. So now, your neighbor named New Hampshire decides to take their turn and randomly shoot rockets into your residential neighborhoods.

      Put yourself in that situation and think about it.

      Don’t get me wrong, I am not removing all blame from Israel and I truly do not understand this situation not even remotely as much as I’d like to. But you have to at least try to look at it from Israels side of things also. Just because you’re stronger than all of your neighbors who are attacking you, doesn’t make them right either.

      1. New Hampshire has a clear “no first use” policy on rockets, unlike those perfidious Vermonters, I might add.

        1. I wasn’t aware of that. Well, I hope they are at least well aware of those evil Canuckistanians lying directly to their North. Because in that case, a pre-emptive stike might actually be justified.

      2. Your analogy is flawed. Now if you add this, maybe it’ll make more sense:
        Vermont has been expanding it’s borders into New Hampshire, which is under Vermont occupation.

    3. “It probably has something to do with the 8000 rockets that have been launched at them over the last few months.”

      They’ve endured much worse in the past. I don’t think the rockets have the terrifying impact on Israelis you assume it does.

      1. Ever been rocketed? I have, repeatedly. While not exactly “terrifying”, it gets pretty fucking annoying, and there’s always the slight chance you’ll be dismembered.

        1. ” it gets pretty fucking annoying”

          You’re obviously not an Israeli. They are a spirited people who are used to conflict. In a town near Gaza, local Jewish inhabitants happily expose themselves to Palestinian terror rockets to watch the fireworks.

          What do you know that these locals don’t? My point is that you are overstating the impact of terror rockets.

          1. mtrueman|7.31.14 @ 8:43PM|#
            “You’re obviously not an Israeli. They are a spirited people who are used to conflict.”

            Yeah, asshole, they have competitions in middle school; “Dodge Rocket”!
            Get lost.

            1. You’re obviously an American. They are a loudmouthed people who are quick to take offense.

              1. mtrueman|7.31.14 @ 10:20PM|#
                “You’re obviously an American. They are a loudmouthed people who are quick to take offense.”

                You’re obviously an asshole. They are stupid people who post ridiculous comments.

              2. You are obviously a collectivist.

                1. That was meant for mtrueman.

                  1. mtrueman is the only one here to speak out against collective punishment. Everyone else is fine with it apparently. I believe that people should be judged individually according to what they’ve done. Everyone else is willing to disregard that, relying on their nationality, ethnicity etc. You’ve managed to get it exactly backwards, super.

                    1. I believe that people should be judged individually according to what they’ve done.

                      Except when it comes to the murder of Israeli civilians by Hamas, then it is a perfectly justifiable act that have spent the last week vociferously defending.

                    2. *that YOU have spent the last week vociferously defending.

                    3. “Except when it comes to the murder of Israeli civilians by Hamas,”

                      To live outside the law you must be honest, to quote a famous Jewish American entertainer.

                      Hamas seem to be able to pull off some presumably well planned and costly operations, on the Israeli military. Civilian casualties are a smallish fraction. There’s been a doctrine of proportionality in warfare for hundreds of years now.

                    4. Civilian casualties are a smallish fraction.

                      Israeli civilians make up the majority of victims in Hamas rocket attacks.

                      The same is true of Hamas sanctioned suicide bombings.

                      Anymore lies to pimp?

                    5. Anymore lies to pimp?

                      No response to me proving your claim as bullshit Martin?

                    6. Hamas is a terror group that uses terror tactics. You’ve successfully proved it. What’s your next challenge, the sky is blue?

                    7. Hamas is a terror group that uses terror tactics. You’ve successfully proved it. What’s your next challenge, the sky is blue?

                      Oh, so this:

                      Hamas seem to be able to pull off some presumably well planned and costly operations, on the Israeli military. Civilian casualties are a smallish fraction.

                      Is just bullshit, then hmmm???

  2. Hard to get peace when the political class you’re negotiating with doesn’t want it.

  3. How’s the Palestinian peace movement doing these days? Oh, wait.

    1. Shut down the thread.

    2. There are reports that Hamas recently executed about 20 peace demonstrators.

  4. “If we just be nice to those sworn to kill us things will get better.”

    Europe 1933
    Israel 2014

  5. the doves are the fringe in Israeli society.

    Where those fuckers belong.

    Israel has an extremely active anti-war movement. It is currently pounding Gaza to smithereens. The IDF and the current Israeli government are *actually* pro-peace and anti-war. They are taking real action to end Hamas aggression. This is in contrast with the fake anti-war peacenazis who want nothing more than the redistribution of death from the Hamas aggressors to the Israeli victims.

    1. ” It is currently pounding Gaza to smithereens.”

      Actually, according to my sources, Israel is about to observe a ceasefire, without having destroyed Palestinian terror tunnels nor having stopped Palestinian terror rockets.

      You should know that the Israeli military is blockading Gaza. Gazans have every right to attack.

      1. And Israel has every right to blockade them, since they use every opportunity to bring in more weapons with which to attack Israel.

        1. Israel doesn’t have the right to engage in war crimes. Which is what the blockade amounts to. It is collective punishment.

          1. mtrueman|7.31.14 @ 8:45PM|#
            “Israel doesn’t have the right to engage in war crimes. Which is what the blockade amounts to”

            No, it doesn’t ‘amount to’ anything of the sort, liar.

          2. Collective punishment? The Palestinians voted these monsters in. They knew exactly what Hamas stands for and what they wanted to do to Israel.

            Elections have consequences. Israel should take the gloves off and wipe these bastards out.

            1. “Israel should take the gloves off and wipe these bastards out.”

              What you don’t understand is that Israelis are big time appeasers of Palestinian terror. Giving terrorists respect, recognition position and money is what Israeli policy is about. Terror works. Everyone else knows it, time’s come for you to know it too.

              I think also Israel puts a lot of stock in their image in US and Europe.

              Don’t really see how Hamas is any worse than Fatah.

              1. mtrueman|7.31.14 @ 10:33PM|#
                …”Don’t really see how Hamas is any worse than Fatah.”

                With all due respect (and I mean that sincerely!) you are too fucking dumb to see much of anything.

                1. Still nothing to add to the conversation?

                  1. mtrueman|8.1.14 @ 1:17AM|#
                    “Still nothing to add to the conversation?”
                    Calling a lying asshole on bullshit is adding quite a bit.
                    Now, do you have anything other than lies to add?

              2. mtrueman|7.31.14 @ 10:33PM|#
                “Israel should take the gloves off and wipe these bastards out.”

                Hey, asshole! You claimed the blockade was a war crime! You were called on your bullshit!
                Put up or shut up!

                1. It’s called collective punishment. It’s a no no under the Geneva Convention. Check the document yourself if you want to know the exact wording.

                  1. It’s called collective punishment. It’s a no no under the Geneva Convention. Check the document yourself if you want to know the exact wording.

                    Which Convention, article, and/or Protocol? I’m not reading all four Conventions in order to fisk your claim, it’s up to you to supply the evidence of your position.

                    1. ” I’m not reading all four Conventions in order to fisk your claim”

                      See what you can find in the first one and get back to me. If it’s evidence you are looking for, why not consider a trip to Gaza? You won’t find this evidence in the pages of the Geneva Convention, I promise you.

                    2. See what you can find in the first one and get back to me.

                      No. Post the actual article and a quote of the exact phrasing or you admit that you are simply lying and you pulled this nonsense line of argumentation out of your ass.

                      You won’t find this evidence in the pages of the Geneva Convention, I promise you.

                      Oooohhhhhhh, so you admit to being full of shit and there is nothing about blockades being a war crime in the Conventions.

                      If it’s evidence you are looking for, why not consider a trip to Gaza?

                      What was it you said last week while defending Hamas murders of Israeli civilians? Ah yes, “It’s called war. Not quite the picnic you been raised to believe it was, apparently.”

                    3. “nothing about blockades”

                      It’s about the crime of collective punishment. I hope you’ve got that by now.

                      What principle in general are you trying to affirm here? What is the libertarian tie in? I can’t make it out. You’re no help, believe me. You specialize in spitting insults, better than that Sevo moran, I grant you.

                    4. It’s about the crime of collective punishment. I hope you’ve got that by now.

                      Which Convention, article, and/or Protocol forbids blockades?

            2. Since we elected Obama, is it okay for Yemenis and Pakistanis to kill us?

              I’m not taking the anti-Israel side at all, I just don’t understand this line of reasoning. “They elected them” is a shitty excuse for doing something to a people whose leaders suck, especially coming from a libertarian.

              1. Has the USG ever endeavored to wipe out Pakistan or Yemen? No? So that’s a stupid fucking comparison.

              2. There is no gulf between Hamas and the people living in Gaza. They elected Hamas knowing full well that Hamas stands for the complete eradication of Israel through terror and other violent means.

                The fault for the civilian casualties in Gaza rests squarely on Hamas and the people who elected them.

                1. This was posted in response to
                  Arkansaustrian Economics|7.31.14 @ 11:13PM|#

                  For whatever reason, it appears here.

          3. Israel doesn’t have the right to engage in war crimes. Which is what the blockade amounts to. It is collective punishment.

            Just last week you were arguing the exact opposite.

            I know, I place too much emphasis on intellectual consistency…

            1. I only said that Israel had the right to defend herself: a banality repeated endlessly by you and friends at CNN. No nation has the right to commit war crimes.

              1. mtrueman|8.1.14 @ 1:13AM|#
                “I only said that Israel had the right to defend herself: a banality repeated endlessly by you and friends at CNN.”
                M’kay

                “No nation has the right to commit war crimes.”
                No, they don’t, shitstain. Are you insinuating one is, but any chance?
                I’m just asking since you’re a lying asshole who sometimes insinuates lies after you toss out a oh, so, kind agreement.
                Are you doing that again?

                1. “Are you doing that again?”

                  I think I’ll keep you in suspense on that question.

              2. No nation has the right to commit war crimes.

                I’d really like to see exactly under which law of warfare a blockade is a war crime.

                The blockade came about because of rocket attacks and suicide bombings. So I wonder what makes the blockade so different? Is it because it’s the Jews doing it?

                1. “I’d really like to see exactly under which law of warfare a blockade is a war crime.”

                  You haven’t really put much thought into this, have you? It’s about punishing those who attack you but taking pains not to harm those who’ve done you no harm. You do that and you won’t have any trouble with the war crimes police.

                  “Is it because it’s the Jews doing it?”

                  Nothing to do with that. It’s about Democracy. Since WW2 at least Democracies have wracked up greater ‘collateral damage’ numbers than autocratic enemies. Israel is no exception.

                  You got any idea why the al Queda running nuts out there in Iraq doesn’t get more involved in this? Hamas and them sided together in Syria so they have a history of being on the same side in a fight.

                  1. You haven’t really put much thought into this, have you? It’s about punishing those who attack you but taking pains not to harm those who’ve done you no harm. You do that and you won’t have any trouble with the war crimes police.

                    So now you’re saying that the intentional attacks by Hamas on Israeli civilians are war crimes and therefore illegitimate?

                    Because that wasn’t the tune you were piping last week.

                    Nothing to do with that. It’s about Democracy. Since WW2 at least Democracies have wracked up greater ‘collateral damage’ numbers than autocratic enemies. Israel is no exception.

                    Cite.

                    Also, WTF does this have to do with your argument that a blockade is a “war crime?”

                    You got any idea why the al Queda running nuts out there in Iraq doesn’t get more involved in this?

                    No, but it has no bearing on anything to do with this discussion, so why are you introducing it?

                    1. “so why are you introducing it?”

                      Thought it was an interesting question. Pardon me for raising it.

                      “Also, WTF does this have to do with your argument that a blockade is a “war crime?””

                      You thought that Israeli Jewishness was responsible for their willingness to inflict relatively high casualty rates among non-Jewish civilians. I am pointing out it has nothing to do with ethnicity, but Democracy. Democracies do this. Read your Anthony Beevor if you want to get more details.

                    2. You thought that Israeli Jewishness was responsible for their willingness to inflict relatively high casualty rates among non-Jewish civilians.

                      No, I didn’t think that you lying turd, I was asking if that is what you thought.

                      I am pointing out it has nothing to do with ethnicity, but Democracy. Democracies do this. Read your Anthony Beevor if you want to get more details.

                      Cite.

                      It is hardly surprising that you are a proponent of autocracy though.

                    3. “I was asking if that is what you thought.”

                      And I gave you an answer and suggested confirming that by reading some history by Anthony Beevor. Have you begun yet? You’ve also got to plough through the Geneva Convention. No substitute for a good education.

                      Not a proponent of autocracy, but I found it counter intuitive that Nazis inflicted less damage than the Allies on the French civilian population after D day (allied invasion of Europe).

                    4. And I gave you an answer and suggested confirming that by reading some history by Anthony Beevor.

                      Show me the stats.

                      You’ve also got to plough through the Geneva Convention.

                      No, I don’t. YOU have to supply the exact article and passage or you admit you are lying.

                      but I found it counter intuitive that Nazis inflicted less damage than the Allies on the French civilian population after D day (allied invasion of Europe).

                      Whoopty shit, don’t care, has NO bearing on the discussion.

                      Stop attempting to change the subject and provide cites.

                    5. “Show me the stats.”

                      Beevor’s book has everything you want. Why pester me for it?

                      Too much of a coward to confront the facts? No surprise there. Just a below average Israeli cheerleader I’m dealing with here. Too lazy to look into cites kindly offered.

                    6. Beevor’s book has everything you want. Why pester me for it?

                      Because you aren’t supplying the evidence, just nebulous and sanctimonious bullshit.

                      Too much of a coward to confront the facts? No surprise there.

                      Clearly you take this personally. You aren’t providing the facts, just insulting “go read a book” bloviating.

                      Just a below average Israeli cheerleader I’m dealing with here.

                      That the best you have?

                      Too lazy to look into cites kindly offered.

                      No cites offered yet.

                      Still waiting on the stats (which aren’t salient to this discussion anyway, just another pathetic attempt at distraction) and the exact Convention, article, and/or Protocol that forbids blockades.

                    7. I gave you a name. Track it down and start reading. You may also try bittorrent, could well be something there. If you a ten year old, ask your teacher for help. If you’re an adult I suggest you go to state sponsored socialist librarian for detailed indoctrination. Or google even. Get busy if you are truly interested, you have more than enough to go on. Don’t waste time and energy in this degrading spectacle.

                    8. Get busy if you are truly interested, you have more than enough to go on.

                      See Martin, when adults debate they are expected to actually back up the claims they make with specific evidence, not give nebulous multi-thousand page reading expeditions.

                      You claimed that democracies inflicted more civilian casualties post-WWII than autocracies. When a cite was demanded you gave me the name of a man who has written 10 books, all of which appear to be about WWII and its immediate aftermath.

                      Tell me which book and which chapter the information supporting your claim are to be found or I will be forced to take your failure to do so as admission that none of Beevor’s books provide support for your claims.

                    9. “So now you’re saying that the intentional attacks by Hamas on Israeli civilians are war crimes and therefore illegitimate?”

                      Yes, I’m saying that now, and further, intentional attacks on any civilians by anyone is a war crime. Do you really need me to tell you this? You seem to be interested in wasting my time.

                    10. Yes, I’m saying that now, and further, intentional attacks on any civilians by anyone is a war crime. Do you really need me to tell you this?

                      You weren’t saying that last week, exactly the opposite in fact.

                      You seem to be interested in wasting my time.

                      Feel free to leave. You made the offer to leave over a year and a half ago if it could be shown that people wanted you to leave. Since the prevailing opinion of you is that you are a lying troll, and nobody entertains your bullshit, why don’t you take that as the evidence and fuck off?

                      Or was that offer just another of your litany of lies?

                    11. “You weren’t saying that last week, exactly the opposite in fact.”

                      So?

                      ” Since the prevailing opinion of you is that you are a lying troll, and nobody entertains your bullshit, why don’t you take that as the evidence and fuck off?”

                      This discussion is entirely personal with you, isn’t it?

                    12. So?

                      How can you not see this as a problem?

                      This discussion is entirely personal with you, isn’t it?

                      Nope. Stop trying to change the subject.

                    13. its evidently your problem, not mine

                      what is the prefered subject other than me and what a rotten person i am?

                    14. its evidently your problem, not mine

                      I forgot, you don’t care about intellectual consistency, even if it means having the same opinion of the same subject week to week.

                      Just last week you were celebrating the Hamas rocket and suicide bombing attacks as righteous acts of war, now you are denouncing them.

                      what is the prefered subject other than me and what a rotten person i am?

                      Still waiting on the Convention, article, and/or Protocol that forbids blockades as a war crime.

                      I’m also curious in which of Beevor’s 10 non-fiction books and which chapter and page I’m supposed to find the stats on post-WWII war casualties. This would be of great interest especially considering all of his books seem to be about WWII and the immediate aftermath, and not much about wars later in the 20th Century.

                    15. Just last week you were celebrating the Hamas rocket and suicide bombing attacks as righteous acts of war, now you are denouncing them.

                      Well, a few hours ago you were denouncing them, now you are claiming (falsely) that they are well-executed attacks against the Israeli military and that civilian casualties are “a smallish fraction.”

                    16. “This would be of great interest especially considering all of his books seem to be about WWII and the immediate aftermath”

                      On the right path! Very good. Carry on digging. Tell us anything interesting you come up with.

                    17. On the right path! Very good. Carry on digging. Tell us anything interesting you come up with.

                      Give me the specific cite.

                    18. I’m also still waiting on the Convention, article, and/or Protocol forbid blockades.

                      You know, the cite that is actually salient to the fucking topic.

                    19. “Just last week you were celebrating the Hamas rocket and suicide bombing attacks as righteous acts of war, now you are denouncing them.”

                      I don’t see the contradiction. In war sometimes these things are beneficial to the cause. It’s expedient. Morally indefensible, too. The PLO wouldn’t have reached the position it had unless it had perpetrated dozens if not more terror operations against Israel. Like the one in the Munich Olympics if you need a cite. Of course the Israeli state is founded by groups that resorted to the same type of tactics Hamas and PLO get up to.

                    20. I don’t see the contradiction. In war sometimes these things are beneficial to the cause.

                      So what makes the blockade and Israeli incursion into Gaza different?

                    21. Still waiting on the specific Convention article, and/or Protocol that forbids blockades.

                    22. “So what makes the blockade and Israeli incursion into Gaza different?”

                      To me it comes down to an attack on an indigenous people whose real crime was that they happened to be living on land which Zionists decided they liked for themselves. Could a libertarian look at it any differently? I’m an anti-colonialist at heart. If you are Zionist, then I understand you disagree. No use pretending you aren’t if you are. How cowardly can you get?

                    23. To me it comes down to an attack on an indigenous people whose real crime was that they happened to be living on land which Zionists decided they liked for themselves.

                      So what you’re telling me is that you support the destruction of Israel and the murder of Jews as expressed by the Hamas Charter?

                    24. Besides now knowing for certain what I’ve suspected since you dropped that “civil disobedience” turd in a Holocaust thread last year, that you hate Jews, your position only makes sense if you are using a double standard.

                      Your position is that war crimes (like actual war crimes, not made-up bullshit) are fine and dandy as long they are being perpetrated by the people whom you support.

                      And the Palestinians are no more “indigenous” than the Jews are.

                    25. ” your position only makes sense if you are using a double standard.”

                      You miss read me. Of course I have a double standard. There’s the colonized whom I support and the colonizer whom I oppose. It has little to do racism though I admit to as much racism as any man. But I don’t have any particular animus towards Jews although, I have been feeling more towards Israel recently, and worry what will happen when the stigma against antisemitism is weakened.

                      You misread me about war crimes. It’s a question of proportionality. How many civilian deaths does that particular target warrant? One is justified in killing some civilians as long as the number of deaths is small and the military importance of the target is big. Stray from that too much and you are heading into war crime territory.

                    26. You misread me about war crimes. It’s a question of proportionality.

                      Nope, I read exactly what you’ve been posting for the last week, the obsession with “proportionality” is just the latest change to your position.

                      One is justified in killing some civilians as long as the number of deaths is small and the military importance of the target is big. Stray from that too much and you are heading into war crime territory.

                      Since the blockade has not directly resulted in civilian deaths, I guess it’s not a war crime.

                      BTW, still waiting on Convention, article, and/or Protocol that forbids blockades.

                    27. “I guess it’s not a war crime.”

                      The war crime is collective punishment. There are others. Have you read Article 3 section 7?

                    28. The war crime is collective punishment. There are others. Have you read Article 3 section 7?

                      Of which Convention?

                    29. Haven’t read the charter. Wars are full of blustery words. This is nothing new. They probably get together and sing rude songs about the Jews, too. Or mock their more ridiculous religious ceremonies.

                      I have no attachment to Israel. I’m not a nationalist. It’s been a problem since the break up of the British empire. Like Kashmir and that Karen state in Burma.

                    30. This:

                      I’m not a nationalist.

                      And this:

                      To me it comes down to an attack on an indigenous people whose real crime was that they happened to be living on land which Zionists decided they liked for themselves. Could a libertarian look at it any differently? I’m an anti-colonialist at heart.

                      Are mutually exclusive.

                      You own views confound you.

                    31. “You own views confound you.”

                      Again, I can’t get over how I must fascinate you. My self impression is that I’m pretty simple and not worth the attention. You flatter me with your close reading.

                      “Are mutually exclusive.”

                      Oh the shame of it!

                    32. Again, I can’t get over how I must fascinate you.

                      You do not fascinate me. Fisking your bullshit and exposing your lies and bigotry is my only goal in interacting with you.

                      Oh the shame of it!

                      Yeah, no problem with being a nationalist, except when you are a nationalist.

                    33. Yeah, no problem with being a nationalist, except when you are claiming to not be nationalist.

                      Fixed.

                    34. The cause is also explicitly the destruction of Israel and dispossession and murder of the Jews.

                      So what you’re telling me is that you support the destruction of Israel and murder of Jews residing in the “Holy Land?”

                    35. “the destruction of Israel”

                      Enough with the hysteria. Look, let’s be honest and racist for one sec. These are Arabs and Jews we are talking about. Semites, even. If you know anything about these people, they live to negotiate. The Jews will eventually talk them down from total destruction.

                    36. Enough with the hysteria.

                      It’s in the Hamas Charter you fuckwit.

                      Look, let’s be honest and racist for one sec. These are Arabs and Jews we are talking about. Semites, even. If you know anything about these people, they live to negotiate.

                      Jew hate confirmed.

                      Thanks for playing.

                    37. “It’s in the Hamas Charter you fuckwit.”

                      It’s just a piece of paper. Don’t give it more weight than it deserves.

                    38. “Jew hate confirmed.”

                      You have to admit that if they had only followed Jesus when they had the chance and lived by His Words, love thy neighbour, we wouldn’t be having these troubles. Reject God’s injunction to love, or suffer strife and degradation.

                    39. You have to admit that if they had only followed Jesus when they had the chance and lived by His Words, love thy neighbour, we wouldn’t be having these troubles.

                      Ahhh, more Jew hate.

                      Out of lies, so straight to the bigotry. I knew there was a reason you’ve had such a hard-on for flinging shit in any threads even tangentially related to Judaism.

                      But yeah man, if only the Jews loved Hamas enough to give them free reign to murder them all.

                    40. ” if only the Jews loved Hamas enough to give them free reign to murder them all.”

                      Again with the theatrics and hysteria. There are some 15,000 Hamas under arms. They are not about to murder all Jews. Get a grip. Oy vey.

                    41. Again with the theatrics and hysteria. There are some 15,000 Hamas under arms. They are not about to murder all Jews. Get a grip. Oy vey.

                      It is their expressed goal.

                      3,000 Einsatzgruppen murdered 2,000,000 people.

                    42. “3,000 Einsatzgruppen murdered 2,000,000 people.”

                      YOu know why? Because Jews cooperated with them. Nazis also promised hot food and work and Jews volunteered to board the trains to Auschwitz. That’s not about to happen again. Stop facing the past, coz the future looks bad for Israel if it can’t come to terms with its neighbours.

                    43. Because Jews cooperated with them.

                      Oh yeah, the “civil disobedience” horseshit again.

                      Of course, you expect the Jews to cooperate with Hamas, so really, what’s different now?

                    44. I like the implication that Jews were themselves at fault for their own murders.

                      I posted this on Friday, I think it needs reposting:

                      You aren’t just mendacious and tedious, you’re also craven.

                    45. I like the implication that Jews were themselves at fault for their own murders.

                      Well, “like” in the sense that you take every opportunity to dig yourself an even deeper hole.

                    46. “you expect the Jews to cooperate with Hamas”

                      Again, if I could change the subject of discussion from myself for a moment, it’s what the US government expects that counts here, and I say yes that’s in the cards.

                    47. Again, if I could change the subject of discussion from myself for a moment, it’s what the US government expects that counts here, and I say yes that’s in the cards.

                      No, the discussion is about the shit you’ve been hurriedly flinging while desperately trying to extricate from your own morally repugnant views.

                      I’m still waiting on the exact Convention, article, and/or Protocol that forbids blockades.

                    48. “I’m still waiting on the exact Convention, article.”

                      That’s fine. When you’ve stopped waiting, feel free to tell me about that too.

                    49. That’s fine. When you’ve stopped waiting, feel free to tell me about that too.

                      You can’t post it can you?

                      So, lies…

                    50. “You can’t post it can you?”

                      I can. I want to see you beg for it.

                    51. I can. I want to see you beg for it.

                      You made a claim, I’ve asked for proof of that claim repeatedly and you can’t supply it, this means your claim is a fabrication.

                      There ends the lesson in adult debate Martin.

                    52. If you care about looking into this matter, you really don’t need my help. I promise you I have furnished all you need and a computer or librarian will be of help as well. This is an adult debate after all. I’m not your daddy, so don’t ask me to hold your hand.

                    53. This is an adult debate after all. I’m not your daddy, so don’t ask me to hold your hand.

                      Adults provide support for their claims.

                      Which Convention, chapter, article, and/or Protocol forbids blockades?

                    54. If you care about looking into this matter, you really don’t need my help.

                      BTW, this isn’t about me “looking into the matter” like I’m an inquisitive schoolboy here to be sent on a lesson of self-discovery. This is a debate. You make claims, you back them up when challenged. You have thus far completely failed to do so.

          4. Oh look a bunch of question begging and non-sequitors.

  6. ” “I think the peace movement became frustrated that nothing changes,” said Maayan Dak of the Women’s Coalition for Peace

    Maybe, like the antiwar movement in the US, and the ‘occupy’ movement, it became overwhelmed by people caught up far more in highlighting their own personal ‘identity politics’ rather than actually forming a single, politically-coordinated mass group committed to any specific change in policy.

    (i.e. you were a bunch of self important retards with zero grip on the political issues surrounding the policy, but thought that walking around, shouting and beating your chests about how your ‘voice must be heard’ because, uhm, “we’re *special*”? – yeah, that will solve problems that Tanks apparently can’t)

    Brought to you by INCITE! Women and Trans People of Color Against Violence

    1. Who needs a Salon parody account when you have this stuff?

      1. i went with my UN-working girlfriend to an ‘anti-iraq-war’ rally in 2003, and pointed out to her the various “Lesbian Lefthanded Dentists Against Fluoridation, War, and Meat” groups present, and noted that this was the very kind of fractured self-consciousness that dooms protest movements to failure. Its when ‘Who You Are’ is actually more important than what the Issue is.

        I also nearly got gangraped by The Vegan Jewish Environmental Caucus of Antiwar Jugglers when I explained to them that

        “The best argument against this war… is that it distracts us from fighting the REAL war more effectively. We should be threatening to bomb Pakistan unless they join the fight in the NWFP”

        Yeah, that didn’t go well

        1. I also nearly got gangraped by The Vegan Jewish Environmental Caucus of Antiwar Jugglers when I explained to them that

          Perhaps word order your confused them did.

          1. would that have been easier on your brain with a semicolon? the quote was the rest of the sentence.

    2. (i.e. you were a bunch of self important retards with zero grip on the political issues surrounding the policy

      HEY! You can’t talk that way about our President and Secretary of State! Ohh, ummm, never mind…

    3. “Maybe, like the antiwar movement in the US, and the ‘occupy’ movement, it became overwhelmed by people caught up far more in highlighting their own personal ‘identity politics’ rather than actually forming a single, politically-coordinated mass group committed to any specific change in policy.”

      I think the divestment and boycott movement against Israel has the potential to mix the personal, ie one’s choices in the market place, with the political, isolating Israel in this case.

      1. How *interveney* of you

        1. “How *interveney* of you”

          Glad you appreciate it. You didn’t seem to understand that a boycott and divestment strategy fits very nicely with a group of people obsessed with their own personal agendas.

          1. mtrueman|7.31.14 @ 9:04PM|#
            …”You didn’t seem to understand that a boycott and divestment strategy fits very nicely with a group of people obsessed with their own personal agendas”

            As opposed to an admitted liar who is, what, obsessed with someone elses’ agenda?
            WIH are you talking about?

            1. “WIH are you talking about?”

              Gilmore: people are too self absorbed these days to make successful mass movements

              Me: yes but boycott and divestment tactics thrive on self absorption

              1. mtrueman|8.1.14 @ 1:29AM|#
                …”Me: yes but boycott and divestment tactics thrive on self absorption”

                When your mom said you were smart? She lied.
                WIH is that comment supposed to mean?

                1. “Me: yes but boycott and divestment tactics thrive on self absorption”

                  For those who wish to waste some time, you can click on asshole’s blog and double his audience this week.
                  It is pathetic, starting with a lame critique of libertarianism ’cause the CHILLUNIZ! Right, asshole?

      2. I think the divestment and boycott movement is weaker than it’s ever been and effectively a joke.

        1. Wait 3, 4 years. Nothing of real import happens immediately in this conflict. Hamas plays its cards right and Americans (and others) will not forget the images of the aftermath of Israeli massacres in schools and hospitals etc.

          1. Hamas plays its cards right

            You aren’t just mendacious and tedious, you’re also craven.

            1. “You aren’t just mendacious and tedious, you’re also craven.”

              You’re lucky the list of my personal failings is endless. You could go on forever cataloging my faults and you’d never get around to spelling out your objections to what I’m saying.

              Are you a fervent supporter of the Jewish state?

          2. Hey, asshole!
            You claimed war crimes, you were called on your bullshit!
            Put up or shut up, asshole!
            And fuck your ‘predictions’; you can’t even get current events right.

  7. Israel is a mess.

    a bunch of pretty dumb arabs tha will not accept the fact that the jews from europe came in droves in 1947 and took their land.

    a bunch of arrogant stubborn dumb jews that will never ever admit that displacing these arabs was not kosher.

    I give to the jews, they are the first group of people on the planet to inhabit a land without murdering the majority of the natives.

    Come on a-rabs, its over 70 years now. Almost 4 generations of israeli jews. Yea, they weaselled themselves in. But at this point, possession is 9/10th of the law.

    1. These are actually some good points.

      1. Good for what?

      2. If th jews would do the the a-rabs what america did for the indians and knee gros (apologies and throw money at it ), a good faith would go a long way.

        If instead of bulding jewish settlements had the israelis helped out these refugees, the a-rabs themselves would take out hamas.

        1. Yes, alice, build a nice house and those who are sworn to kill you will turn warm and fuzzy.
          Fucking idjit.

          1. Actually, the israelis showed up to the a-rabs house with a slip from the UN saying that the arabs need to move into the basement and make some room for some germans.

            This was sketchy. It doesn’t matter that it was ok with the un, us,uk, and the german jews. The a-rabs should had had some say.

            But as i said, possession is 9/10th of the law.

            1. Israel is entitled to the land they have now. Pretty much no one on the planet is on any land right now, that someone, sometime in the past, didn’t steal from someone else. So at some point, this has to stop.

              And it’s hard for me to feel sorry for the Palestinians, libertarians have no land and we’re being terrorized by a progressive police state that we don’t want to be a party to. And no, I’m not joking. But then again, libertarians haven’t started shelling DC yet. When we do, I expect them to shoot back.

              1. They are entitled to it now, 70 years and four generations after they weaselled themselves into it.

                But even Libertarians should agree from a property rights perspective that the arabs were clearly not compensated nor were they asked if it was ok to take the land.

                1. “They weaseled into it”

                  No they didn’t Captain Shitheel. Many Jews lived there or in the region as 2nd class citizens. In any event they have every right to move there and establish a free nation.

        2. Why doesn’t Egypt just give the Palestinians a big lot of land. They have plenty of it. Israel is tiny. Seriously, Israel is only 2/3 the size of Maryland, and Maryland is a pretty small state. Has any country offered this?

          1. I have always said that we should move the West Bank Arabs to Gaza and make palestine contiguous.

            Plus, it is right on the mediterainian.

            Israel should invest in hotels, tourism, casinos, prositutes, etc. Grow the A-rab economy and show some good faith.

            Believe me, once the a-rabs four generations detached start seeing some prosperity, they themselves will not let the radicals ruin it.

            MONEY IS GOD and it speaks 7 languages.

            1. You’re actually being pretty reasonable today, Alice. What has happened to you? You been hanging around here too long?

              1. Libertarians here pretty much changed my mind on Healthcare in many ways.

                But what I want now is probably kosher to libertarians.

                I once pushed for a free market for healthcare with no health insurance and a public clinic for the poor, disabled, retired, and major medical.

                THE VA set my Liberal Ass straight.

                1. Fuck you, alice.

      3. All right, I shouldn’t have hitched my chariot to Alice, she doesn’t seem 100% there. Makes me look sane.

    2. …”a bunch of pretty dumb arabs tha will not accept the fact that the jews from europe came in droves in 1947 and took their land.”…

      Oh, look! Another lefty lie from the asshole alice!

    3. *the jews from europe came in droves in 1947 and took their land.*

      LOL. Go read a book.

      1. The zionist movement startedin the early 1800s and european jews legitimately purchased land from arabs and setup up settlements.

        Generally speaking things were not that bad.

        Are you sayig that almost 1.8 million jews didn’t move fro germany to israel between 1945 ans 1948?

        1. “Are you sayig that almost 1.8 million jews didn’t move fro germany to israel between 1945 ans 1948?”

          Are you saying people can’t re-immigrate?

          1. When that depends on the Country Sevo.

            Given that a country does have an immigration policy, immigrants generally have to purchase (or rent) the space they live on

            1. “Given that a country does have an immigration policy, immigrants generally have to purchase (or rent) the space they live on”

              So all you’ve got is some misdirection? Not surprising.

              1. That’s funny Sevo.

                Can we import some Guatemalan’s to take your home? I’ll make sure to obtain a UN resolution 1st.

                1. Alice Bowie|7.31.14 @ 8:38PM|#
                  “Can we import some Guatemalan’s to take your home? I’ll make sure to obtain a UN resolution 1st.”

                  More bullshit from the admitted troll? Surprise!
                  Fuck you, alice

    4. 70 years? In 2014, we still have jihadists singing about how they will retake Spain, and the last emirate in Andalusia fell in 1492.

      While we, as Americans, might have the collective historical memory of a goldfish, in other cultures, they have the memories of elephants to nurse grudges that last centuries. It’s not just in the Middle East; ask your average Chinese about the Opium Wars and you’ll be surprised with the passion the subject arouses.

    5. they are the first group of people on the planet to inhabit a land without murdering the majority of the natives.

      ALL the way back to 2 years before Israel was created, the Soviet Union ejected 12 million Germans from Eastern Europe – including Prussia. They also booted million of Poles out of Eastern Poland and settled them in Prussia.

      The Germans and Poles don’t live in refugee camps and launch rockets into Russia for some reason.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E…..rld_War_II

      1. Not that the rocket attacks don’t need to stop, but that’s not a very good comparison, because those groups still have their own countries, which the Palestinians don’t have.

        1. Prussian Germans still have their own country? By that logic, Palestinians have their own country.

          1. The country of Germany was formed when the Prussians achieved hegemony over the other German states. How is Germany not a country for Prussians? Palestinians are Arabs, but they’re not Jordanian or Egyptian. Prussians are German. Furthermore, considering that Poland and east Germany were under soviet occupation for 45 years I’m not sure how they could have done anything to the ussr.

            1. Why does this matter? If the Palis got their own ‘nation’ it would be worthless shithole just like ever other one that isn’t Israel. It’s not about creating a Palestine, it’s about destroying Israel.

            2. Well, wait a minute. How are they not analogous?

              Prussians are Germans, but they’re not Hessians or Rhinelanders. They had their own distinct subculture of the Germanis Tribe.

              Just as Palestinians are a subculture of Arabs – so if Germany is good enough for Prussians (and not all Germanic people live in Germany – Northern Italy, Alsace, Switzerland, Austria, etc.), then how are other Arab countries not good enough for Palestinians?

              1. …”then how are other Arab countries not good enough for Palestinians?”

                Tribalism?

        2. The Palestinian countries are Jordan and Egypt (the countries that the West Bank and the Gaza Strip were part of before the various Arab-Israeli wars). Neither of which really want them back, apparently.

    6. “a bunch of pretty dumb arabs tha will not accept the fact that the jews from europe came in droves in 1947 and took their land.”

      Arabs should have totally capitulated to these German socialists way back in the 40s, out of respect for the suffering of WW2.

      1. Oh, goody!
        Liar who is proud to be a hypocrite shows up to, what, talk out of both sides of his mouth?

        1. “Oh, goody!”

          Interesting choice of words.

          1. Sarcasm, asshole.

    7. “…that the jews from europe came in droves in 1947 and took their land.”

      While there were a considerable number of European Jews who immigrated, there was always a substantial number of Jews living in the area since it was ancient Israel. The idea that the Jews were outsiders who stole Arab land is a meme that needs to die.

  8. Why dont we just give the 6.5 million a-rabs $100k each? it will cost $650 billion.
    a lot less than Uncle Sap paid in wars and giving money to israel.

    Plus we can make those rich a-rabs and israel pay some too.

    1. Alice Bowie|7.31.14 @ 5:50PM|#
      “Why dont we”

      Is that a turd in your pocket, alice?

      1. Sevo, my friend:

        do u no wat keeps me young and pretty???

        Not taking internet commenting so personal.

        1. Fuck you, alice.

    2. Why don’t some country with a lot of land give them some? Say, a patch of land about the size of Israel, about 8000 sq miles.

      If all the world wants to fight about land and who was their first, then we should just nuke the planet now because no one can win that one.

      1. The problems here are 1) The first Arab-Israeli war was very recent historically and there’s been sporadic ongoing conflict with big flare ups occasionally ever since. 2) the ongoing Israeli settlement and occupation of the West Bank is a very current event. That said, Hamas needs to fuck off and die and the Palestinians need to accept that the right of return is not going to happen.

        1. Well that, and the “West Bank” is a very current construction in itself. But calling it Judea and Samaria would be kind of award, you know. I mean we call people from Samaria “Samaritans,” but what do you call someone from Judea? “Judenese”?

          1. Do the Palestinians not like being called Judeans? Funny, that.

          2. People called Judeans, they go the house?

          3. Was that really the first name for those places ever? By this logic, everyone needs to clear out of the USA to give it back to the natives. The fact that Jews used to live in Judaea and Samaria does not make what Israel and the settlers are doing ok.

        2. “the ongoing Israeli settlement and occupation of the West Bank is a very current event.” and it is barely ancillary to the conflict. This is about destroying Israel. Israel’s building of schools and shopping malls did not start or worsen this conflict.

  9. Few would argue against Israel’s right to defend itself against attacks from Hamas

    Oh, is that so?

  10. the Israeli populace is far more concerned with temporary security than permanent peace.

    I’m struggling with this. Honestly, I just can’t quite imagine how the Israelis get a permanent peace by going giving up their security. Do you see a path to “permanent peace” that involves the Israelis willingly subjecting themselves to attack without any retaliation or self-defense?

    Do you think the Palis just need to get it out of their systems, and if they kill, oh, I dunno, a few thousand Jews without repercussion because the Israelis have given up on “temporary” security, they will decide to accept a two-state solution and settle down to be good neighbors?

    Do you think maybe the Israelis aren’t pursuing a permanent peace because they’ve tried that, and it hasn’t worked, and they realize that there simply will be no such thing in this generation, so they are settling for what security they can get?

    1. Look, If I showed up to your house with the MAYOR of your town and told you that the TOWN Board voted that you need to live in the basement and my family will live in the rest of your house, I would probably have to defend myself if you are going to live down there. Especially when I start finishing part of the basement and start living there as well.

      1. WTF is this crazy bitch talking about?

  11. I was told the other day by someone who seemed to be pulling his “more libertarian than thou” card that “we libertarians care not for the conflicts of others and you will find very little interest in your petty foreign policy concerns…”

    …yet it *is* a little odd, this TEAM picking in the perennial Arab vs Jew Battle-Royale.

    here we really do have an opportunity ‘not to care less’. I think the less the US is involved or ‘intervening’, the better, no?

    1. I agree.

      I’m a big fan of Jews. Jews were a big influence in my life.

      I was even a shabbat goy in high school at the local B’nai Jacob.

      That said, I feel that All Americans should not be taxed to give Israel $5 billion a Year.

      Cut off all military and financial aid to ALL COUNTRIES.

      It’s ok to give humanitairan aid for natural disasters or medical help. But, please, let’s stay out of other people’s bar fights. We know how this ends.

      1. Fuck you, alice

        1. Sevo, dude, you’re not exactly helping to raise the tone of the conversation….

          1. I know. And he calls me a troll

          2. Papaya, go back up thread and check alice’s BS.

            1. It’s not BS. It’s an opinion.

              But please Papaya. See my points and see other people respond. Then, compare those to Sevo’s response.

              1. You admit to being here to do nothing other than troll.
                Fuck you, alice.

    2. GILMORE|7.31.14 @ 7:53PM|#
      “here we really do have an opportunity ‘not to care less’. I think the less the US is involved or ‘intervening’, the better, no?”

      I do care, but that in no way presumes US involvement.

      1. Yeah, I sort of anticipated the ‘we can root for one side and still not want to be involved’ line.

        it *is* worth noting that one does beget/enable the other. neither here nor there.

        It also does prompt a lot of finger-pointing bullshit from various camps. I really enjoyed (and perhaps i will find the clip and sample the line) when Kmele was repeating, “WHO IS DEFENDING HAMAS!?” on the indys aftershow.

        I’m not even sure what exactly his point was – i assume he was saying that the topic re: Israel/Palestine is so charged that any position that seems to deviate from proscribed pro/con talking points devolves into bizarre accusations of “HAMAS APOLOGIA?!?”.

        1. I’m not comfortable with ‘rooting’; it’s hardly a sporting event.
          The fact is Hamas declares for the extermination of those who are born Jewish; you know who did the same.

        2. one does beget/enable the other

          No it doesn’t.

  12. Well, golly gee…. I didn’t know thatReason Magazine was into holocaust denial. The researchers had to search for this issue in microfiche as you Nazi types didn’t put it online for obvious reasons. No wonder you hate Israel so much. Maybe if your Islamic terrorist heroes kill the six million Jews of Israel, you’ll come out with an issue denying that ever happened, too.

    1. You are a fucking idiot. That’s your explanation for why an article from 40 years ago wasn’t online?

      1. Is this the same Underzog who used to call all of us a bunch of R?hmites before presumably getting banned?

        1. I hope so, since that would mean there’s only 1. While the extremists on the Jewish/Israeli side don’t have as much power as Hamas does in Gaza/Palestine, there are some pretty scary individuals and groups, especially among the settlers.

    2. …”I didn’t know thatReason Magazine was into holocaust denial.”…

      Not surprising, since it’s a lie.

      1. Hey pal…. Since you know da truff about the holohoax; etc., here are some other important revisionist works that you can pursue (especially with your heavy dependence on drugs): The Irish Potatoe Famine Hoax and Canada exposed as the real culprit behind 9/11

        Yassir, let’s apply Reason’s revisionist view of thought to other subjects and not just the joos.

        “There’s no need to fear. Underzog is here.”

        1. Underzog|7.31.14 @ 10:06PM|#
          “Hey pal…. Since you know da truff about the holohoax;”

          Hey, asshole, try reading.
          Fuck off.

  13. This is a spill-over from the Syrian conflict where 10,000s have been killed and the Egyptian coup where 1000s have been killed. But a few hundreds get killed in Gaza and its the biggest thing ever.

    The result of the Syrian war will likely decide the course of the Middle East for the next 30 years. The success/failure of the Egyptian coup will do likewise for North Africa.

    The conclusion of every Israeli – Palestinian conflict is always essentially the same and will change nothing.

    Why bother watching this minor sideshow?

    1. Why bother watching this minor sideshow?

      To me what’s interesting about it is the Western – mostly European – reaction to it. They certainly enjoy their feelings of moral righteousness when condemning the Israelis. There’s this creepy need to identify with the Palestinians as the victims and weep and demonstrate sympathy unlike anything they express for suffering people in other countries. I can’t help but wonder if its not about suppressed hostility to the Jews for the obvious reason. And also because they’re afraid of NOT being sympathetic in the eyes of their immigrant populations.

      The various Palestinian sympathizers, whether Arab or Western, really use them like emotional prostitutes – sickening really – and that certainly doesn’t encourage them (the Palis) to accept any rational course.

      Psychologically it is seriously fucked-up.

  14. War is being fought against them. In what sense could they be anti-war, unless it were to surrender?

    This is nonsensical.

  15. “What happened to Israel’s anti-war movement?”

    There was that anti-war protest in Tel Aviv a week ago that was interrupted by Hamas rockets. Sort of undercut the point they were trying to make.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.