The Jews and the Iraq War
Ron Coleman
America's Reform Jews aren't just liberal about their religion -- they're liberal liberal. So they've come out pro-surrender on Iraq.
Today one orthodox Jewish group answered back.
About
A note on our important Editorial Policy.
Your donations help make Dean's World possible.
Or you could buy something for Dean from his WISH LIST!
Dean Esmay
Editor-In-Chief
Freedomist Network
Individual postings by contributors copyright by their respective authors.
Editor-In-Chief
Contributing Editors
Celia Farber
Categories
Music, Movies, Books, and Etc.
Questioning the HIV/AIDS establishment
Subscribe
Archives
Old Archives
We Support
|
Dean's World uses and recommends:
They are basically a rogue agency in TWO governments.
Oh, wait. You're a Jew. You know exactly what you're up to. Never mind. Go back to hoodwinking us dupes.
And they also (gasp!), support a two state-solution in the Middle East.
Pro-Surrender? I thought only the French were pro-surrender. Oh wait. I'm thinking Cheese-Eating Surrender Monkeys.
This is fun! It is like being on an interactive virtual Fox news show. When do we start calling Edwards a homo and mocking Michael J. Fox's hypochrodria?
You are a hateful little git, aren't you?
DMZ: go join your buddies David Duke and the Daily Kos, will ya? You ain't welcome here.
Yours,
Wince
No matter what happens, it's America and/or the current President who are at fault. No matter what we do, no matter what they do, it will always be America's fault no matter what the fuck happens in the world.
Banning is probably not appropriate.
Carry on. This should be worth watching, if "DMZ" should continue. Watching the steeped-in-the-Kool-Aid hatemonger try to defend the indefensible is probably a worthy endeavor.
When is America not at fault for the world's ailments, I wonder?
Wince, you are a sport for offering some support.
Usually, the right-wingers are very intolerant of dissenting views. Shakes them up when boots don't march in lock-step,
Looks like you're giving mine a chance.
I will attempt to keep it more than real.
Are we still eating African babies? Now, I won't let us get off the hook that easily. We have had a hand in a few major foreign policy disasters in the past 50 years, and our intent has usually been "good" but not all the time.
There are those on both sides of the aisle in powerful think tanks that want to remake the world in our image, and there are those that want us to do all that is in our power to remain the world's only superpower.
I guess sometimes we are perceived as a big happy retarded kid on the playground that accidently breaks things because we are so strong and clumsy.
Now, I will say that without our positive influence on the world, this planet WOULD be "in a world of shit."
So, yes we occassionally suck, but only until you compare us to everyone else who's got a horse in the race. I always get a chuckle out of people who say something like, "well, Sweden is a perfect example of how thing should be run." And that's probably true. If all the people in the world could act Swedish for awhile, we'd be ok. But that's not going to happen. There are bad forces in the world; shit is gonna happen, and who are you going to call? (Ghostbusters? My ass!).
You're going to call the United States of America because 9/10 times, we are the only ones that can help.
What else would you pay a think tank to do? Figure out how to fail? We've got plenty of that, free of charge.
It isn't anti-Semitism if the Joos really are the puppetmasters of all war and oppression in the world.
And they're the evil masterminds of international capitalism because Karl Marx said so in "der judenfrage".
And they're the evil masterminds of the international communist conspiracy because Karl Marx was Jewish.
PS:
The plug-in spell checker of Mozilla Firefox demands you spell Jewish with a capital J. If that doesn't tell you all you need to know I don't know whar does.
What happens if the Iraqis freely elect al-qaeda to run their government.
Is democracy a good thing?
You tell me.
DMZ: I really hate referring to people by cutesy nicknames and initials when trying to have a serious discussion. You got an actual first name, or you gonna keep hiding?
Anyway: yes, democracy is a good thing. It is the only legitimate form of government. It is also the only thing--the ONLY thing--that has EVER been shown to be a reliable protector of freedom and human rights. It's also the best remedy against war that has ever been devised, and is as fundamental a human right as free speech and free press and freedom of religion.
I'm sure you don't believe it. Not when you spout the same paint-by-numbers lefty cant that everyone here has heard a thousand times before (What, you thought we hadn't? Some of us used to think just like you, you know. Before we educated ourselves and left the echo chamber behind.)
And it is a powerful lobby, although hardly the most powerful one there is.
Lobbying is normal, healthy activity in any functioning democracy. Criticizing a specific lobby is perfectly allowable so far as I can see. Sure obsessing over one Jewish lobby is suspicious but not all by itself proof of much except blinkered stupidity.
But that al-Q running Iraq from the imposition of dictatorship where there is no chance of other parties running against them fair and square is worse still.
And, hopefully, a Constitutional Democracy would include checks on power that would otherwise not be in place.
See, I don't blame the electorate in those cases, but the leadership for not offering viable, on-message alternatives. I don't say 'F Red Staters' if I'm a Dem, but 'F Dem leadership' for choosing, say, Kerry.
True democracy is not just elections. It involves a host of factors involving institutions and checks and balances that take a long time to build. Political scientists have a host of measures that they used to measure whether a nation is really a democracy or not. They're pretty precise, and they've been in use for decades. You pretty much want to use either the Freedom House or the Polity data sets to decide whether a country is truly a democracy or not. Iraq, for example, does not qualify as a true democracy yet, although if they stay on course they will probably achieve that in a few more years (assuming Americans don't do the evil thing and bail out of them of course).
This I have no answer for except that the swift boat thing was a filthy tactic.
Meanwhile Bush gets a pass for protecting the Texas border against the mexican hordes as the occassional fly boy and then leads the chicken hawks into battle 35-40 years later.
Making Kerry's patriotism and service "the question" was a act of genius. Evil genius.
So democracies are not perfect and people get smeared and mob rule makes many mistakes.
Like the past 8 years for example.
So lets not pretend that we "support the people and their decisions."
The US supports its own self-interests.
Yes, that is correct in most cases. And that is *exactly* as it should be.
But let's go ahead and play your game a little further, as this should be educational:
As I explained above, elections alone do not a democracy make. They are one important step in that direction and need to be encouraged, but they do not constitute a democracy.
It may be possible one day to say that Hamas is a legitimate political party in a legitimate democracy. I hope that happens within my lifetime. But, it is neither one at the moment. Your suggestion that Hamas *is* a legitimate political party in a legitimate democracy suggests either that you're poorly educated, a racist, or an Islamophobe. (Not that they're all mutually exclusive of course, they often go together.) Honestly, what it says about your opinion of Arabs in general is really rather nauseating.
OK?
That gets me out of a lot of conflict here because I think alot of the rhetoric here is disingenuous.
America is strong and we take what we want.
That is an honest assessment.
I am particularly disinterested in my status as a "troll." Troll here meaning someone who does not extend the courtesy of agreeing or understanding the question in exactly the same way.
I will do any and all to answer questions honestly as they are addressed to me. Troll or no.
People here are really SO sensative.
You said:
lol. Hamas was freely elected under the scrutiny of Colin Powell and other international bodies. The judgements and the nausea are yours. I have no idea about that. I am only saying who was elected and how the US responded.
My status as a troll comes from presenting information and opinions contradictory to yours.
That is not really fair.
No.
Because it is very much in our benefit for there to be a free Iraqi state not encumbered by terrorist-sponsoring dictators.
Their freedom is in our direct interests. Your Americaphobic tendencies are destroying your ability to think.
That gets me out of a lot of conflict here because I think alot of the rhetoric here is disingenuous.
Funny. I think you accuse people of "rhetoric" when you don't really understand what they're saying, and haven't made any real effort to.
America is strong and we take what we want.
That is an honest assessment.
It may be honest. It's also a shallow, hateful, Americaphobic and racist assessment. But you're free to keep to it. And if enough people believe that, maybe we'll actually start acting like that--even though we don't.
I act in my self-interests every day. So do you. It does not make me a tyrant any more than it makes you one.
So then I repeat, as I did above: "You got an actual first name, or you gonna keep hiding? "
lol. Hamas was freely elected under the scrutiny of Colin Powell and other international bodies. The judgements and the nausea are yours. I have no idea about that. I am only saying who was elected and how the US responded.
Then let me try to explain this one more time for you and your America-hating friends:
Democracy is defined as more than just elections. Please stop making me repeat this, as it gets old.
They have passed the first, lowest hurdle toward that point. They may well be evolving toward becoming legitimate democratic institutions. I certainly hope so. But it's stupid (at best, if not outright racist and bigoted)--to suggest that because we don't support murdering terrorists who manage to get elected, this means we don't actually support democracy.
You need to educate yourself, "dmz." Stop spouting bumper sticker philosophy and acting proud of yourself for it.
Fine. Different words, same meaning.
I'm shallow and ill-informed, so please. Do tell. Did Saddam sponsor terrorism? Which group?
Uninformed minds want to know.
Everyone here is very sensative. So I want to step softly and carry a bigass truth stick.
Fine. Different words, same meaning.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA!
Yeah, sure, if you distort and pervert the words to fit your silly Americaphobic paranoia, they mean the same thing.
If we were making them in our own image, we wouldn't have let them write their own Constitution, we wouldn't have sat back and protected them while they voted for whatever politicians they wanted (as opposed to the ones we wanted), and we'd be doing quite a few other things we're not even remotely attempting to do.
Because we aren't trying to remake them in our image. Unless you're so deeply Islamophobic and/or anti-Arab as to believe that things like democracy and freedom are somehow things the Iraqis aren't entitled to.
Or are so shallow as to think these are ideas that belong to America and are therefore "in America's image" wherever they're found.
I'm shallow and ill-informed, so please. Do tell. Did Saddam sponsor terrorism? Which group?
Council on Foreign Relations report on Iraq and terrorism.
You aren't being criticized for disagreeing with me. You're being criticized for making all sorts of outrageous and hatefully bigoted generalizations. That's all.
To have an economic system where a small store can become a great mercantile business is terrible? As an example, in the middle east as it is currently arranged, there is little wealth produced outside of oil revenue, an extraction industry. Yet in Michigan, many Arab emigres have built up retail and wholesale and manufacturing companies that are very wealthy.
Why can they do that here but can't at home? And why is that a bad thing?
Of course there are foreign policy mistakes; we're human, we're not perfect. And if perfection is what you are looking for you'll always be disappointed, in yourself first of all. We're good, not perfect; and good should always be promoted. You are an Americaphobe, always looking for the slightest speck in America's makeup, and ignoring the forests in it's enemies'.
Sod off, dmz.
I can see that not all of you here are wilting daisies and plenty of you know how to dish it out.
I will respond in due time so don't be offended.
This thread is really about Pro-surrender liberal Jews and I will wait for my opportunity to deploy and engage at a later date.
Thank you for offering to return to the topic of thread you highjacked once your highjacking got shoved (again) in the place it deserves to be.
So head back to the Daou Report, or Salon, or wherever it is that you hale from and get some more talking points for you to put in your quiver before you return. God knows we haven't seen any of those before, nor responded to them ad nauseum.
And as you strap on your armor, keep repeating your incantation "America not perfect, thus bad; America not perfect, thus bad." It'll help keep you warm when you do actually address the topic of the thread. For whatever good that is.
We're fully within our rights to respond as we have - by witholding aid, or even not recognizing them on a diplomatic level. But you'll note they're still in office, hmm? Free to rule, just not on our dime.
We do have a tendency to eat weak arguments for snacks around here. If you can come back and have more to say, dmz, you'll be welcome. Although I'd still like to know your real first name.
Live to fight another day. Then sally forth again, wiser.
Entirely correct.
They are still in power, and control their own fate. Now they must deal with the reality of being in elected office, and how to keep that status with their electorate, and also deal with other elected powers.
They're recognized. They now have stark choices to make.
My own guess is that Hamas is going to eventually turn into a non-terrorist party. How long will that take? If you think in terms of decades, I'd guess it won't be too long. For if future elections are held, they'll have a choice: do they want to destroy the democratic order, or do they want to get re-elected legitimately?
Signs are so far they'd rather not subvert the democratic order. Else they'd still be at war with Fatah.
People think this is a cheap shot but it's not: America's Democratic Party was the party of the Confederate sympathizers during the Civil War, and was the party of the Ku Klux Klan for generations. It's nothing like that anymore.
Times change. I have hope.
Of course we all lose our tempers now and then. Dean freely admits to being imperfect in this regard, which is why regulars to this establishment will generally be cut more slack than people who we don't know very well.
Still: behave like an adult, or go find somewhere else to play. Thanks.