Enjoy an Ads-Free Jets Insider - Become a Jets Insider VIP!
Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Another gem from VDH

  1. #1
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Post Thanks / Like
    The best writer around today:

    [url=http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson200310310840.asp]http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanso...00310310840.asp[/url]

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Kingston, NY
    Posts
    3,975
    Post Thanks / Like
    (crickets)

    BTW...HARPER'S kicks national review's arse!


    Bracing for your reply probably something like [url]www.harpersfalsehoods.com[/url]

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Kingston, NY
    Posts
    3,975
    Post Thanks / Like
    Harper's Magazine Weekly Review

    OCTOBER 28, 2003

    Iraqi guerrillas using a homemade launching pad fired eight to ten rockets at the Al Rasheed hotel in Baghdad, where American officials have been staying since April. Some of the Americans were seen fleeing the luxury hotel in their pajamas and shorts; one of the missiles struck a floor just below Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, but he escaped unhurt. The following day, a suicide bomber driving an ambulance struck the offices of the International Red Cross in Baghdad; the bomb left a six-foot-deep crater and broke windows a mile away. Within 45 minutes, bombers struck four police stations in other neighborhoods; at least 34 died and more than 200 were injured. "The more successful we are on the ground," said President Bush, "the more these killers will react." The Pentagon was planning to spend $335 million on high-tech solutions to the guerrilla war; the measures include electronic jamming devices, tethered blimps with digital cameras, and other "rapid-reaction/new solution" technologies. Several soldiers home from Iraq on leave went AWOL. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld admitted in a leaked memo that the United States still doesn't have much of a plan for fighting the war on terrorism, and in a published interview he called for a new government bureaucracy to fight the "war of ideas" against international terrorism. There were grumblings among Republicans, none of whom spoke on the record, that Rumsfeld has become a political liability. The chairman of the independent commission investigating September 11 threatened to subpoena the White House for documents that it has been refusing to turn over. FBI agents at the Norfolk, Virginia, airport took anal swabs from a mechanical farting dog to make sure it did not contain explosives. The lawyer for Captain James Yee, the former American prison-camp chaplain who was arrested for being a Muslim spy, complained that his client was being mistreated in prison. President Bush was reportedly astonished to discover, during his recent trip to Asia, that Muslims around the world believe that the United States is hostile to them. In Arizona, a firefighter pleaded guilty to starting a wildfire so that he could get paid for putting it out.

    Firestorms in southern California killed at least 13 people and drove tens of thousands from their homes. A large geomagnetic storm caused by explosions on the surface of the sun (called coronal mass ejections) hit the earth but caused few disruptions. Lightning struck the actor who plays Jesus Christ in Mel Gibson's current film project, "The Passion of Christ," during a shoot in Italy. The United States was granted broad exemptions for the use of methyl bromide, a pesticide that damages the ozone layer; the chemical was supposed to be banned under the Montreal Protocol, which the U.S. signed. Strawberry and tomato farmers, as well as the owners of golf courses, will benefit. New satellite observations revealed that Arctic warming is much more severe than was previously thought and that the amount of Arctic sea ice was at a record low. The U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board concluded that the government's plan to bury nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, near Las Vegas, is dangerously flawed; the design, the board said, would lead to the corrosion and perforation of the containers, and thus to leaks. Autopsies of 11 people in Pennsylvania revealed high concentrations of cadmium, a toxic metal. Much of Zimbabwe's wildlife is being wiped out by poachers, naturalists said, and Human Rights Watch accused Zimbabwe of using famine as a weapon against political dissidents. Brewers in Colorado were offering a pint of beer in exchange for a pint of blood.

    A former Navy lawyer revealed that President Lyndon B. Johnson and Robert McNamara, his secretary of defense, ordered those who were investigating the 1967 Israeli attack on the American ship Liberty to conclude that the incident, in which 34 American servicemen died, was an accident, even though the evidence pointed overwhelmingly to the contrary. An Israeli helicopter fired a rocket at a car in the Gaza Strip; after a crowd gathered, another rocket was fired, killing at least eight people and injuring 70. Israeli officials initially disputed the claim that bystanders were injured in the second strike and released a videotape as evidence; upon closer examination, however, the tape confirmed the Palestinian version of the events. Colin Powell was trying to make peace in Sudan. The emirate of Dubai announced that it will build a $5 billion amusement park that will include an artificial rain forest and a ski slope. A letter containing ricin, a powerful poison, was discovered in an airport post office in South Carolina. Egremont, Massachusetts, a town in the Berkshire Mountains, voted to block its roads with sandbags to keep plague-ridden New Yorkers away in the event of a bioterror attack on the city. Charitable giving was down. New research estimated that British people collectively stand in line for 1.3 billion hours a year. Human Rights Watch reported that about 20 percent of America's prison inmates are crazy. The U.S. Senate banned "partial-birth abortions," a procedure known by doctors as "intact dilation and extraction." Six English schoolboys were hospitalized after it was learned they had taken Viagra during lunch; "by the the time the afternoon lessons began," said a source, "there was no hiding what they had done." Sales of industrial robots were up 26 percent. Creatures that are capable of changing their sex, it was discovered, typically do so when they have reached 72 percent of their maximum body size. German chemists discovered the secret ingredient in the preservation of Egyptian mummies. There were new reports of cannibalism in Congo, and in Croatia a one-year-old boy was attacked by a gang of babies and bitten 30 times. Facial tumors were killing off Tasmanian devils, and western Africa was suffering a plague of dusty locusts.

    óRoger D. Hodge


    Copyright © 2003 Harper's Magazine Foundation.

  4. #4
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by tailgators[/i]@Oct 31 2003, 12:59 PM
    [b] (crickets)

    BTW...HARPER'S kicks national review's arse!


    Bracing for your reply probably something like [url]www.harpersfalsehoods.com[/url] [/b][/quote]
    Tail - did you even read VDH's column?

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Kingston, NY
    Posts
    3,975
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by jets5ever+Oct 31 2003, 02:12 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>[b]QUOTE[/b] (jets5ever @ Oct 31 2003, 02:12 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--tailgators[/i]@Oct 31 2003, 12:59 PM
    [b] (crickets)

    BTW...HARPER&#39;S kicks national review&#39;s arse&#33;


    Bracing for your reply probably something like [url]www.harpersfalsehoods.com[/url] [/b][/quote]
    Tail - did you even read VDH&#39;s column? [/b][/quote]
    Yes I did. Would you kindly explain (in 100 words or less) why you thought this was so good?

    BTW...Vic Hanson is quite a contortionist. Also, isn&#39;t he the father of those kids that had that annoying pop band a few years back?

    UMMMM BOP&#33;&#33;

  6. #6
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    38,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    i too don&#39;t understand why you thought this article was so great. yeah Muslims hate Jews - and Jews aren&#39;t the root of all evil.

    its not exactly grounds to stop the presses.

  7. #7
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by bitonti[/i]@Oct 31 2003, 02:39 PM
    [b] i too don&#39;t understand why you thought this article was so great. yeah Muslims hate Jews - and Jews aren&#39;t the root of all evil.

    its not exactly grounds to stop the presses. [/b][/quote]
    It&#39;s considerably more involved than that, dude.

    Sorry, it&#39;s not a picture of Bush next to a chimp or a cartoon, so you may not relate to it. ;)

    How was Amsterdam - was there good smoke?

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Kingston, NY
    Posts
    3,975
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by jets5ever[/i]@Oct 31 2003, 04:40 PM
    [b] It&#39;s considerably more involved than that, dude.

    Sorry, it&#39;s not a picture of Bush next to a chimp or a cartoon, so you may not relate to it.

    How was Amsterdam - was there good smoke? [/b][/quote]
    5-ever...Does smugness come naturally to you, or do you have to practice at it?

    Really man, climb off the high horse of your&#39;s.

  9. #9
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by tailgators+Oct 31 2003, 03:49 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>[b]QUOTE[/b] (tailgators @ Oct 31 2003, 03:49 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--jets5ever[/i]@Oct 31 2003, 04:40 PM
    [b] It&#39;s considerably more involved than that, dude.

    Sorry, it&#39;s not a picture of Bush next to a chimp or a cartoon, so you may not relate to it.

    How was Amsterdam - was there good smoke? [/b][/quote]
    5-ever...Does smugness come naturally to you, or do you have to practice at it?

    Really man, climb off the high horse of your&#39;s. [/b][/quote]
    Save it.

  10. #10
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    38,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    good smoke is the understatement of the year... :D

  11. #11
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by bitonti[/i]@Oct 31 2003, 03:52 PM
    [b] good smoke is the understatement of the year... :D [/b][/quote]
    DAMMIT&#33; I am jealous.

    Tell me it was ridiculously cheap and I am on the next plane&#33;&#33;

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Kingston, NY
    Posts
    3,975
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by jets5ever+Oct 31 2003, 04:56 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>[b]QUOTE[/b] (jets5ever @ Oct 31 2003, 04:56 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--bitonti[/i]@Oct 31 2003, 03:52 PM
    [b] good smoke is the understatement of the year... :D [/b][/quote]
    DAMMIT&#33; I am jealous.

    Tell me it was ridiculously cheap and I am on the next plane&#33;&#33; [/b][/quote]
    It&#39;s ridiculously cheap.

    Now Go&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;

  13. #13
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    38,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    5 euros a gram - but its not the price so much as the quality.

    if you ever go let me know and i will inform you of the good spots.

  14. #14
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    851
    Post Thanks / Like
    If nothing else, you have to be impressed by this thread taking a turn into some nice bud, considering it started with a link to one of those cheeky moralizing Right articles that gets in its requisite shots towards atheism, violent films. To be fair, he didn&#39;t specifically mention pot-heads, though it&#39;s hardly a stretch to envision this guy writing about the effects of too much pot-smoking causing latent anti-Semitism. :D

    As for the meat of the article, yeah there&#39;s still anti-Semites in the world. And yeah, it&#39;s still a problem, as is any racism or deeply rooted hatred for a nationality, religion, or ideology can be when milked by rabble-rousers and cheap lip service. But as with most right wing articles (and many left wing ones), the same logical twists are taken to get from namedropping some useless French and Greek dip****s who didnt&#39;t condemn the Malaysian idiot PM enough to suggesting that all American liberals love Mahathir Mohamad. The same conservatives who mock any liberal concern that many influential and rich people in this country would love to turn it into a fundamentalist Baptist theocracy will humor any argument, no matter how thin, that ties any left-of-Bush concern to anti-Semitism or Communism.

    For a lot of these guys, it&#39;s all smokescreens to smear ANYONE who criticizes Israel or questions why America should blindly support the country or apply a double standard between them and Iraq vis-a-vis the "useless" UN. I haven&#39;t read enough of this VDH guy to see how deep the pathology runs, but I&#39;ve read plenty of Daniel Pipes that my Israel-obssessed friend keeps sending me.

    Obviously, American officials are going to deal better with a country that shares SOME common ideals of democracy and religion vs. 3rd world Arab dictatorships, and there&#39;s nothing wrong with that. But why it&#39;s seem as some huge immoral stance when some European countries declare that it&#39;s NOT THEIR PROBLEM goes back to the same fear-mongering and cheapening of what is a more complex argument than "Israel good and never wrong, all Arabs bad and always wrong" -- just like when people continue their twists of justifying the Iraq war based on UN resolutions or aggression when Israel has violated more UN regulations than anyone, it all goes back to the same lip sevice and convenient arguments.

    That he even brings Tarantino films into it is interesting, but at least this guy is straight-up enough to admit part of the problem with whacky kids IS the films and sleaze in and of itself rather than trying to blame homosexuality and atheism for it like some people on this board in the past. That said, I think his argument is pretty weak if he&#39;s suggesting even 1% of American self-identified "liberals" agree with whatever idiot brought up the "Tarantino Films == Jewish gore destroying America" thing in the first place. That&#39;s right up there with Pat Robertson type histrionics.

    On the other hand, the concern he brings up about liberals sympathizing with Palestinians and other anti-Israeli arguments, is a much bigger concern that DOES find its way into more than 1% of liberal thought right now. I just strongly disagree it comes back to anti-Semitism for most Americans and younger Europeans; I could see the argument that they&#39;re being put in the unfortunate position of throwing their lot in with people who DO harbor these nasty ideologies, but that&#39;s EXACTLY how I feel every time a seemingly sensible libertarian type starts agreeing with freaks like Bork, Coulter, Limbaugh, and sees support of Bush as a necessity to the immediate survival of America let alone a "lesser of two evils".

  15. #15
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Jet Set Junta[/i]@Nov 4 2003, 10:40 AM
    [b] If nothing else, you have to be impressed by this thread taking a turn into some nice bud, considering it started with a link to one of those cheeky moralizing Right articles that gets in its requisite shots towards atheism, violent films. To be fair, he didn&#39;t specifically mention pot-heads, though it&#39;s hardly a stretch to envision this guy writing about the effects of too much pot-smoking causing latent anti-Semitism. :D

    As for the meat of the article, yeah there&#39;s still anti-Semites in the world. And yeah, it&#39;s still a problem, as is any racism or deeply rooted hatred for a nationality, religion, or ideology can be when milked by rabble-rousers and cheap lip service. But as with most right wing articles (and many left wing ones), the same logical twists are taken to get from namedropping some useless French and Greek dip****s who didnt&#39;t condemn the Malaysian idiot PM enough to suggesting that all American liberals love Mahathir Mohamad. The same conservatives who mock any liberal concern that many influential and rich people in this country would love to turn it into a fundamentalist Baptist theocracy will humor any argument, no matter how thin, that ties any left-of-Bush concern to anti-Semitism or Communism.

    For a lot of these guys, it&#39;s all smokescreens to smear ANYONE who criticizes Israel or questions why America should blindly support the country or apply a double standard between them and Iraq vis-a-vis the "useless" UN. I haven&#39;t read enough of this VDH guy to see how deep the pathology runs, but I&#39;ve read plenty of Daniel Pipes that my Israel-obssessed friend keeps sending me.

    Obviously, American officials are going to deal better with a country that shares SOME common ideals of democracy and religion vs. 3rd world Arab dictatorships, and there&#39;s nothing wrong with that. But why it&#39;s seem as some huge immoral stance when some European countries declare that it&#39;s NOT THEIR PROBLEM goes back to the same fear-mongering and cheapening of what is a more complex argument than "Israel good and never wrong, all Arabs bad and always wrong" -- just like when people continue their twists of justifying the Iraq war based on UN resolutions or aggression when Israel has violated more UN regulations than anyone, it all goes back to the same lip sevice and convenient arguments.

    That he even brings Tarantino films into it is interesting, but at least this guy is straight-up enough to admit part of the problem with whacky kids IS the films and sleaze in and of itself rather than trying to blame homosexuality and atheism for it like some people on this board in the past. That said, I think his argument is pretty weak if he&#39;s suggesting even 1% of American self-identified "liberals" agree with whatever idiot brought up the "Tarantino Films == Jewish gore destroying America" thing in the first place. That&#39;s right up there with Pat Robertson type histrionics.

    On the other hand, the concern he brings up about liberals sympathizing with Palestinians and other anti-Israeli arguments, is a much bigger concern that DOES find its way into more than 1% of liberal thought right now. I just strongly disagree it comes back to anti-Semitism for most Americans and younger Europeans; I could see the argument that they&#39;re being put in the unfortunate position of throwing their lot in with people who DO harbor these nasty ideologies, but that&#39;s EXACTLY how I feel every time a seemingly sensible libertarian type starts agreeing with freaks like Bork, Coulter, Limbaugh, and sees support of Bush as a necessity to the immediate survival of America let alone a "lesser of two evils". [/b][/quote]
    Fair enough, but Europe does a hellofalot more than say "it&#39;s not our problem" dude. They give money to Hamas&#33;&#33; They STILL don&#39;t even acknowledge that Hamas and Hizbollah are terrorist organizations&#33; Political party my a&#036;&#036;.

    I do NOT think the argument about anti-semitism is "thin." It&#39;s not so startling that this Malaysian guy said what he said, the amazing thing is that he&#39;s STILL considered a "moderate" Arab. The French HELPED Hitler round up the Jews in to this very DAY they instruct their Jewish nationals to not walk around looking too "overtly Jewish" in public.

    It is unbelievable to me that you can equate anti-semitism to Borkian fears of "the right" wanting to impose an fundamentalist theocracy&#33; As if thay are even in the same ballpark&#33; When&#39;s the last time the Conservative Army beat your doors down and gassed your children and put you in a concentration camp or, failing that, planted a nail-filled bomb at a gay bar that ripped apart "heathens?"

    Seriously - Europeans killed 6 million Jews, and give money presently to the terrorists who surround and continue to kill Jews and don&#39;t say peep whenever Arabs talk[i] publicly [/i]about &#39;final victories.&#39; Then you make some snide clap-trap about "well, I mean, that&#39;s a thin argument, and a lot of conservatives secretly would love to have a theocracy, so they&#39;re all hypocrites blah blah blah." Spare me the sh*t - the Arabs OPENLY seek the destrcution of Israel and Europeans tried to exterminate the Jews only a few short years ago&#33; That is a lot more immediate and nefarious than some suspected plot you have in your mind.

    You can talk about "violating UN sanctions" all you want but you know damn well that EVERY country, including your detached and evolved Europeans (with their "complex" attitudes) violate them as well. Israel defends itself and is surrounded by 50 states that would like to see it destroyed and have been attacked numerous times and respond militarily to terrorist attacks. Can we find instanced where they have been overzealous and brutal in their reprisals? Sure we can. But the undeniable fact that no one likes to talk about is that Israel makes and has made good faith efforts at a settlement. All Israel wants is to be left alone. This is NOT true for the Arabs or the "Palestinians." They seek the destruction if Israel. Nothing less. It is IMPOSSIBLE to negotiate with a people so constituted.

    As far as Iraq goes - they were defiant and obstructionist for a long time and it came time to pay the piper. You can piss off America for only so long and Saddam had ample, ample opportunity to save his own ass and chose not too. The UN and violations are all window-dressing. Saddam didn&#39;t live up to an agreement he made with us and he (eventually) paid the price for it. It was a simple choice and an obvious one.

    It is NOT all smokescreens dude. Your problem is that you cling to this idea that you are detached and "above the fray" and that somehow your opinions (even though you seem not to have any strong ones, aside from ripping &#39;freaks&#39; who usually are conservative) are objective calculated and therefore more evolved. It requires no skill whatsoever to sit on the sidelines with your arms crossed and snipe at the flaws in both sides or to point out extremism and thusly claim that every member of either side is at fault. Aside from feeling good about yourself, where do those "observations" get you?? You literally compared supporting Arab terrorists who kill infants with people who parrot Ann Coulter, as if both misguded attempts at ideology are equally destructive. Are you f*cking serious??

    Where do you stand on the Israel-Palestine conflict? What side are you on? Spare me the long explanations about how neither side is perfect and both make mistakes and that dialogue is necessary and blah blah blah. I would appreciate knowing which side you are on and why...

    BTW - what&#39;s wrong with Daniel Pipes?

  16. #16
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    851
    Post Thanks / Like
    Umm, last terrorist acts done in the name of Baptist-style fundamentalism? Eric Rudolph and the Reverend Paul Hill for starters? Last I checked, their actions happened a lot more recently than the Nazis. If you think Europe is right around the corner from another Nazi uprising, then that&#39;s your burden to carry.

    What I see going on is more European governments willfully detaching themselves from the Israeli-Palestine thing, because they don&#39;t have the obssession that current American officials carry towards the fate of Israel. I&#39;d even spot you that some outright recent Israel&#39;s policies. Is it rooted in anti-Semitism, or just plain apathy and pragmatism for their own national interests? I can&#39;t say, as I&#39;m not an expert in French and Greek politics. I&#39;d love to see the links you have proving which European governments are openly donating money to Hammas, that&#39;s a completely new one to me.

    As to why the American gov&#39;t and particularly the recent Republican power brokers are concerned so much with Israel, I personally think it goes back to the dual ideals of neoconservatism and fundamentalism. The neocons see Israel as the key to their PNAC views of a reshaped Middle East, and the fundies see it as the key to helping the Book of Revelation come true so Jesus will come back and send everyone to heaven. I don&#39;t disagree with the RESULTS per se of the neocons vs. the crap we have currently in the ME, I&#39;ve just always disputed the cost, arrogance, and investment of the project and what it really buys the average American in terms of piece of mind, gas prices, etc.

    You know by now where I stand on the fundamentaliss, and you can dismiss my concerns as alarmist hysteria all you wish. I guarantee you that they are more than 20x as influential, powerful, and serious as anyone still identifying as a "communist" and wishing for a Marxist utopia in this country. Go and check out the platform for the Texas Republican Party sometime, since it spawned the current sitting President and House Majority Leader. And yet I still hear alarmist tirades and cheap shots of that word from at least 5 people on this board; Come Back to NY thinks CNN stands for "Commie News Network".

    In many ways, I see the American stance on Israel similar to the one they have against Cuba; basically driven by policy zealots, special-interest brokers, and Presidents who are afraid to piss them off and be seen as anti-Israel or pro-Castro. This was true of Clinton as much as it is Bush, and goes well back to Reagan et al. Meanwhile, I question if such a simplistic stance is really in the best interests of the American people (see above vis-a-vis the PNAC).

    As for my take, I want to see the 1967 borders re-established, a serious crackdown by a coalition (of UN, Israel, and whatever Palestianian leadership) to STOP THE SUICIDE BOMBINGS. I&#39;d even support an all-out campaign to root out Hammas the way Bush said we were doing with Al-Queda before this stupid Iraq thing consumed 90% of our money and resources.

    The problems in Israel will not stop until both sides take responsibility to keep their extremists in line, and though I happily concede that the Israeli tanks/bulldozers are by far the lesser of two evils to the suicide bombers in terms of humane targeting, they are both essentially destructive attacks that kill people and accomplish nothing but pissing the other side off to retaliate more.

    From what I read, there&#39;s a sizeable plurality of Israelis AND normal street Arabs from bordering countries and Palestinian enclaves who support ALL of these above plans. But I firmly believe that no current or recent American President has the balls to take the proactive action and risk alienating the "Israel is never wrong" zealots in order to force this action into place, or at least force NATO/UN into making it a priority. I commend Bush for making some noises to that end a couple of years back, seriously, but it ended up right where Clinton and Carter&#39;s cheap talk ended.

    I have never taken a "detached" stance on the entire thing, and if I thought I was "above the fray" I wouldn&#39;t go out and vote today, I wouldn&#39;t waste time arguing with you here, and I wouldn&#39;t ever put my money where my mouth is in terms of what I support as a consumer. But as my country is currently spending 100 billion and more to win over the "hearts and minds" of the Middle East (since we never, um, found any weapons), at some point I have to ask: What about the Israel problems? It goes back to bitonti&#39;s old refrain of "fix it or leave it the hell alone entirely". Simplistic, for sure, but better IMO than most of what we do now over there.

    As for your last bit, you know goddamned well I was equating people who critique Israel with people who agree with some of Coulter et al&#39;s works. I NEVER said people who agree with the latter are equivalent to the Nazis or the Palestinian suicide bombers. That you&#39;d make that conclusion either as a cheap shot or as a serious conclusion from my post is EXACTLY what I was critiquing in VDH&#39;s article -- this immediate lumping of Israeli skepticism, dislike of Bush&#39;s legacy, or concern for what happens to the Palestinians long-term with "anti-Semitism" and desire for the Nazis to come back and put everyone in concentration camps.

  17. #17
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Post Thanks / Like
    Read between the lines:

    [url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3191167.stm]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3191167.stm[/url]

    They refuse to calssify Hamas as a terrorist organization and stop giving it money, even today.

    "Apathy" my ass...as if the money they give doesn&#39;t go to terror.

    Why do you want the 1967 borders established? What are &#39;Palestinians?&#39; ...and why can&#39;t the &#39;Palestinans&#39; live in Saudi Arabia? I mean, since the arabs are SO VERY CONCERNED with their living situations, etc. There&#39;s more than enough land to go around, huh?

    Go read the PLO charter (including their final goal), and tell me how a peace is possible with these people.

    When do I ever talk about communists?

    Look, I was NOT generalizing the way you imply. I am defending Israel&#39;s right to defend herself and immediately you lump me and ones like me to some fanatical &#39;Israel is never wrong" cabal, which is just as ludicrous as you accuse VDH of being. If you don&#39;t think there is anti-semitism in Europe then I don&#39;t know what I can do for you.....

    The fundamental difference between Israel and the "Palestinians" is that Israel just wants to be left alone. This is NOT true for the other side. Arafat had a chance to have a separate state and 95% of the territory that he wanted and he scoffed at that notion. NO ONE speaks for the &#39;Palestinians&#39; besides Hamas. Targeting terrorists with military strikes is QUITE different than ripping apart infants in cafes, you know this, I know this and everyone knows this.

    You can talk about "fix it or leave it alone entirely" but what do you mean by fix it? Cause it seems like the USA is trying to &#39;fix" Iraq and all you do is whine about that and take cheap shots or call it &#39;arrogant.&#39; I am a bright enough guy, but do not know what "concern for what happens to the Palestinians long-term" means. I really don&#39;t. There is no long term with these guys - nobody had ever heard of &#39;Palestinians" until 1949&#33;&#33; They are the same arabs as are in Jordan, Lebanon and Saudi Arabia. The invading arab armies told all the the arabs living in what is now called the West Bank and Gaza to get out of the way of the advancing armies on their march towards Israel. Israel fought them off, but Egypt and TransJordan controlled the currently disputed areas, which were originally part of Israel. They proceedes to slaughter and butcher the Jews living there for years and CONTINUED TO INVADE Israel. Then, in 1967, Israel re-took those lands, but are no considered to be &#39;occupiers" and the "Palestinians" are the victims who are now without homes, even though other Arab nations, if they truly cared about the "long term" welfare of Palestinians could EASILY take them in to their countries. Instead, they DON&#39;T ALLOW the "Palestinians" to move&#33;&#33;&#33; They created and continue to exploit the plight of their own people in an effort to acheive politically what they cannot acheive militarily - meaning, the destruction of Israel. Israel, despite all of this, has offered to have a separate state and give up 95% of the &#39;disputed" territories essentially is the PLO and Hamas would actually acknowledge their right to exist. &#39;let us be and stop killing our children." And the Palestinians will not agree.

    And you sit there and talk about how Anti-Semitism has nothing to do with it or that people think &#39;Israel is ever wrong" or that you are just &#39;concerned about the palestinians long-term.&#39; It&#39;s a friggin joke, it really is.

    Take a gander at this, but I know you&#39;ll dismiss these guys anyway:

    [url=http://www.factsandlogic.org/purpose.html]http://www.factsandlogic.org/purpose.html[/url]

  18. #18
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    851
    Post Thanks / Like
    I&#39;ve had a rough day, and don&#39;t have time to argue everything. Maybe some other time. In brief:

    As part of "What I would do", I do not consider the PLO the final authority on Palestine&#39;s "leadership" nor do I consider Hamas a legitimate organization. I agree Arafat is a joke and has blown too many chances at "peace" to be negotiated with as a &#39;leader&#39; of a future Palestine. If a new peace process comes into play, it has to include new "Palestinian" leadership.

    As for the imaginary Palestianians who didn&#39;t exist before 1949, I&#39;ve heard plenty of arguments about that. The original British mandate that created Israel called for "A Jewish State within Palestine", not "A Jewish state in place of Palestine". Telling them all to go to Jordan or Saudi Arabia is wishful thinking, and doesn&#39;t right every wrong that led to the current problem of settlers on both sides being perceived as "illegal occupants". A peace plan HAS to include land somewhere in Gaza and/or West Bank for displaced Palestinians; even Sharon and his ilk have conceded this.

    Why pre-1967 borders? Because it&#39;s the best compromise I&#39;ve seen the most moderates on both sides agree with, and I just want peace. Israel isn&#39;t going to disappear, nor should it. But it&#39;s not going to get the Sanai peninsula back or anything either, nor should it.

    Finally: my argument was never that anti-Semitism doesn&#39;t exist in contemporary Europe. My argument has always been that not all liberal/leftist critique of Israel stems from anti-Semitism. And I see evidence of that in VDH&#39;s article when he opens a rant on anti-Semitism by calling it a "widespread amorality" of the Left alongside atheism. To me, it&#39;s as cheap as crying "racist" every time a Black politican is criticized, and, yes, crying "homophobe" every time a particularly annoying gay person is bashed (which I differentiate from being obsessed with the evils of gay marriage in the abstract, but that&#39;s another dead conversation that had frankly depressing results last time we argued it here).

  19. #19
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Post Thanks / Like
    Fair enough.

    I disagree in terms of degree and I think you aren&#39;t quite getting what VDH means, but his style takes getting used to. I also agree that all of contemporary critiques of Israel are NOT due to anti-semitism, anti Americanism is a large part of the equation as well. Historic anti-semitism and current anti-americanism make for a pretty bad climate for Israel, however.

    I agree that the gay marriage argument had depressing results as well, but unfortunately we both know our sh*t and both have passionate feelings on that subject and are pretty much not willing to budge.

    For the record - I don&#39;t think Israel is 100% right all of the time and part of what I wrote and [i]the way [/i]I wrote it was just to be inflammatory and to illict explanations from you and to see exactly how much you knew and why you thought the way you did. You know your stuff, which I shouldn&#39;t have questioned, it&#39;s just that early on in the discussion you seemed (IMO) to be taking pot-shots and not really saying anything. It annoys me when liberals are REFLEXIVELY pro-Palestine simply because that&#39;s part of the memo they got, in addition to being pro-abortion, gun control, socialism, anti global warming, Iraq and "big business. and whatever other cliched position they take. I don&#39;t think anti-semitism breeds this view per se, but rather that misguided and ignorant emotion. I think many liberals are anti-Israel simply because they are told to be by their leaders, frankly. Obviously, you do not fall into this category.

    I &#39;lean&#39; towards Israel in many ways and freely admit that bias, mostly because I DO think they are considerably "more right" in how they have acted and I have an innate respect for the way they treat their own people, especially in comparison to arab states. But Yes, Sharon and his ilk concede those points as you mention, largely for pragmatic reasons and (IMO) not philosophical ones. But I think we DO agree the the major and material barriers to peace are not within Israel, but rather, with the PLO and Hama. Yes, the extremists on BOTH sides are culpable, but extremists on Israel&#39;s side are REACTING to terror, rather than PERPETUATING it, which is, to me, the big difference when assigning &#39;blame.&#39;

    However, I ALSO think we shouldn&#39;t have ever created Israel in the first place&#33; But since we did, it&#39;s our problem.

    Sorry for being shrill - thanks for thaking the time to answer.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us