Post New

About time. 22 democrats voted with most of the GOP on the censure motion.

22 democrats voted with most of the GOP

Now if there were only 22 republicans with a little bit of integrity, some beneficial work might get done in the House.

It's too bad she was censured.

But then again, it sometimes takes awhile for contrarian voices to be heard.

Too bad 22 Democrats betrayed a Woman of Color.

No surprise. As I have said - she'll be ousted when Israeli interests decide they want to oust her without turning her into a martyr.

But, nevertheless, all over the Western World.

Oh the times they are a changing.

People, are speaking up.

I used to be scared of this. Still am. Literally scared. The people being targeted by the Left - have done great things for civil rights - -- that many of us benefit from to this day. BUT, well, sometimes one's duty is unfortunate. and displeasing.

Here's to the Left, the Woke, the Europeans and the United Nations.

Events of the last few months have been a game changer forever.

Ehen Tlaib is censured, an the best we get is "balah blah blah 22 Republicans" - - well, good.


Here's to Tlaib. Imperfect messenger to be sure. But the good part is there's so many many others and they are not hiding in the rocks anymore. They are less stifled. They feel more free to speak out.

I didn't start this. The Left did.

Republicans censured her and what did you get here? You got a comment of "22 Republicans with integrity blah blah blah blah".

Republicans, you are being used.

I think Tlaib is disconnected.

I just read (NYT pay-site) that Tlaib declared that the American people are "not with you" (referring to Biden).

Uhhhh...yeah, they are. By a large majority, they support Israel. Even if many have some misgivings about past Israeli behavior, and how that may have contributed to attitudes in the region. But very few people support Hamas, the attack last month by Hamas, nor the taking of hostages by Hamas. So I have to call BS on Tlaib. I get that she's Palestinian-American, and I'm sure this is a painful situation for her (e.g. I'll bet she has family there). But, no, America is not with Hamas. If she can't see that, she's in her own bubble.

I didn't see the full context of her statement, but I can safely assert America is not with Hamas in any way. Many of us have great sympathy for the innocent civilians being killed, most of whom want no part of this conflict. But Hamas has given Israel little choice, and apparently that was exactly what they had in mind.

Though at this point it would be a calculated risk either way. Israel could continue operations, creating more animosity in the region. Or they could stop, pull back, and cease-fire; which leaves Hamas intact to reorganize. The latter would be trying to avoid playing Hamas' game. The former is a (likely futile) attempt to destroy Hamas, but it would seriously impede further operations by Hamas for several years while they recover and regroup.

But I digress. Tlaib is simply wrong.

I think Tlaib is disconnected.<.i>

I think there's a trend in which political orators simply state what they wish the case was, regardless of what the reality is.

Tlaib wishes for the readership of her belief, the watchers of her airtime, to believe her and fall in line with her schtick....

It works for people with charisma, honest or fraudulent, but not so much for frantic religious partisans.

I think Tlaib is disconnected.

Somewhat. I mean, she's not wrong that there's probably some aspect of Biden's approach to Israel and Gaza that you could find a majority of Americans object to. That's why she used the circumlocution that the American people are not "with you," rather than saying that the American people believe X.

But it's also somewhat just rhetoric. People respond to political advertising that suggests that their neighbors support/believe something, so people who are advocating for a position know to frame their position as if it had majority support. Not that President Biden will believe that, but so other members of the public will believe it.

I do think, though, that there's a little bit of the "epistomological bubble" thing going here, too. Just as progressive Jews have been a little surprised to find out how little support there is for the existence of Israel among their far left allies, I think those far left allies are a little surprised to find out how much pushback there is in the overall Democratic party to their beliefs about Israel. I think a good many of them thought it was self-evident how all good-thinking people ought to think about these issues, and they're somewhat surprised to find a difference of opinion from what their circles believe.

Somewhat. I mean, she's not wrong that there's probably some aspect of Biden's approach to Israel and Gaza that you could find a majority of Americans object to. That's why she used the circumlocution that the American people are not "with you," rather than saying that the American people believe X.

When Tlaib says "the people aren't with you" she's referring to the various protests popping up. She's using that as her proxy for "the people".

I do think, though, that there's a little bit of the "epistomological bubble" thing going here, too. Just as progressive Jews have been a little surprised to find out how little support there is for the existence of Israel among their far left allies, I think those far left allies are a little surprised to find out how much pushback there is in the overall Democratic party to their beliefs about Israel. I think a good many of them thought it was self-evident how all good-thinking people ought to think about these issues, and they're somewhat surprised to find a difference of opinion from what their circles believe.

Yes. This is a text I received yesterday:

BREAKING: Far-right extremist and white nationalist Marjorie Taylor Greene is once again pushing to censure progressive Rep. Rashida Tlaib for speaking out in support of Palestine.

Rashida is the only Palestinian in Congress ' she's bravely calling for a ceasefire and an end to the Israeli military's genocide and ethnic cleansing of Palestine. Attacks on Rashida are getting uglier by the day.

Justice Democrats is proud to have been with Rashida, and we'll continue to support her in the fight for human rights.

𝗖𝗮𝗻 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗿𝘂𝘀𝗵 𝗮 𝗱𝗼𝗻𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗿𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝗻𝗼𝘄 𝘁𝗼 𝗲𝗻𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝘄𝗲 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗼𝘂𝗿𝗰𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝗿𝗲-𝗲𝗹𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆 𝗺𝗲𝗺𝗯𝗲𝗿 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗦𝗾𝘂𝗮𝗱 𝗻𝗲𝘅𝘁 𝘆𝗲𝗮𝗿? justdems.us/chip-in-nov-7?t=2VBjq

- Justice Democrats
Text STOP to quit

I texted STOP. I did not rush a donation.

I texted STOP. I did not rush a donation.

You and albaby raise an excellent point. Sometimes you provide raw meat to the ravening masses so they'll send you money, even if you know the raw meat isn't quite right. Maybe she did that?

Or perhaps "justice democrats" were taking advantage of the situation, and Tlaib didn't really plan that. Just speculation.

Or maybe she is in a bubble, and was surprised by the reaction.

I think those far left allies are a little surprised to find out how much pushback there is in the overall Democratic party to their beliefs about Israel.

And I'm sympathetic with them, but they do have to see that. I 100% believe Israel has a right to exist and in peace too, but it's messy. And we tend to not like things that are messy, we want straight forward crystal clear.

One thing Israel has going for it is our religious right wants to see that Temple of Solomon rebuilt. Thank God for that favor. 😜 Because if it wasn't for that, I don't think you'd see support from that corner. End times, rapture - it really does look like a death cult at times. I mean it's been during my lifetime they learned to tolerate Catholicism.

This whole anti-Jewish thing has never made sense to me. It's like it shouldn't exist, but obviously it's there.

I don't think Tlaib is disconnected. It's true she is a lone voice in congress pleading for relief for the Palestinian people, but worldwide, demonstrations against the unjust collective punishment of the Palestinians are unprecedented, including 160,000 in Tel Aviv.

If you argue that Israel has the right to self-defense, a dubious description of the current military action, then why do the Palestinian's not have the same right to self-defense. There is no difference to my view between the actions of Hamas in October or the IDF currently, except that the IDF casualties are an order of magnitude greater already and climbing. Death by knife or AK47 is no more grisly than death by burning or being buried alive in rubble. Dead is dead. Imagine the damaged children with third degree burns and no pain relief. Imagine ruined faces and bodies; undergoing amputations without anesthesia. These are life altering injuries from which there is no recovery. The Hamas atrocities are in response to prior Israeli atrocities all the way back to the Nakba in 1948. Tit for tat, violence begets violence.

How can anyone believe that the current action by the IDF will eradicate Hamas? Was the US military able to similarly eradicate the Viet Cong, or ISIS, or the Taliban. Fruitless endeavor. This looks to me more like a program designed to drive all the residents of Gaza south, claiming North Gaza for Israel. After all, It the same playbook used in the West Bank currently, and for the foundation of Israel in 1948.

Can we agree that Palestinians are human beings worthy of human rights, and not human animals as described by the Israeli defense minister?
And who would treat even animals so poorly?

Please direct your replies, if any, to the points raised. Cat calls of antisemitism will be roundly ignored. Zionism is not equivalent to the Jewish faith.

fd

There is no difference to my view between the actions of Hamas in October or the IDF currently, except that the IDF casualties are an order of magnitude greater already and climbing.

I think this is the fundamental disagreement.

There is a difference between deliberately making the intentional murder and kidnapping of noncombatants your objective, and conducting military operations against an attacking belligerent knowing that it will result in unintended civilian deaths. The fact that the physical outcome is the same to the dead people does not make the actions equivalent, either morally or under international law.

Hamas doesn't get a "free pass" to attack Israel without a responsive attack simply because they have embedded themselves (unlawfully) within a civilian population. The fact that responsive combat against Hamas will unavoidably result in civilian casualties does not make the IDF's actions equivalent to Hamas' actions.

It's just false to claim a lack of difference between the intentional killing of noncombatants with the unavoidable and unintended killing of noncombatants.

How can anyone believe that the current action by the IDF will eradicate Hamas? Was the US military able to similarly eradicate the Viet Cong, or ISIS, or the Taliban. Fruitless endeavor. This looks to me more like a program designed to drive all the residents of Gaza south, claiming North Gaza for Israel.

I do. The US was able to substantially degrade the operational capacity of both Al Qaeda and ISIS to near-nil. The brand of Hamas might continue on (like those brands do) - but the specific organization as it presently is constituted can be degraded to near inutility. And the destruction of all of their physical resources in Gaza - the weapons and supply caches, tunnel networks, and other facilities - will substantially diminish the threat they pose.

Can we agree that Palestinians are human beings worthy of human rights, and not human animals as described by the Israeli defense minister?

Of course - although it's pretty clear from context that the Israeli defense minister was referring to Hamas (the people they are fighting against, and who committed the atrocities) and not the Palestinian people writ large. Well, clear unless you're predisposed to apply the worst possible interpretation on them because that's where your starting from.

It's true she is a lone voice in congress pleading for relief for the Palestinian people

Is that accurate? Does the administration have no support in congress for the aid programs the administration is supporting?

...unjust collective punishment of the Palestinians are unprecedented

I do not accept that description. Israel, the Jews, the Zionists, 'the chosen people', have been on the defensive for all of recorded history.

The Palestinians have not been willing or able to ensure a peaceful coexistence with Israel. They elected Hamas. This is a tragedy of their own making.

As to the genocide accusations; Israel could have simply carpet bombed, with no warning, all known Hamas installations the day of the Hamas attacks. They did not.

The whole thing sucks, but there's no doubt that the people with the most to lose in this latest episode of antisemitism, are the Jews.

"I do not accept that description. Israel, the Jews, the Zionists, 'the chosen people', have been on the defensive for all of recorded history. "

Why. Why haven't all the bast groups been on the defensive forever? Were human babies at time of birth, told by the doctor to go cause trouble for a certain group of people? Did every OBGYN from Bethlehem way back when, to Boston General last Tuesday embed a chip in baby's souls? How did this constant coincidence, happen? And how did it remains constant despite the world changing in so many ways? What are the odds that ONE group is on the defense, all the time....and do things happen just for no random reason.

albaby1,

Your argument would have merit if the IDF actions at all fit the "mission statement" of eradication of Hamas. Not since WWII has there been such carpet bombing of civilians, and at that time there was truly an existential threat. The IDF is the 4th largest military in the world and Israel is NOT fighting for it's life. Where are the Seal Team equivalents performing surgical strikes? It is clear that Palestinian civilian casualties are of little concern to Israel's leaders. Witness the cruelty of cutting off water and power to starve the Gazan people of sustenance and medical care. How is this justifiable?

The consequences of the current actions, despite the rhetoric of the press releases, is needless cruelty and death with yet again displacement of Palestinians from, and destructions of their homes. It is inexcusable and it is a war crime, if this slaughter can be called a war. Hold Hamas responsible for their crimes, not the Palestinians at large.

Sano

The history of the hatred of Jews is too long, too vicious, and too present. It is a despicable stain on our collective species. In turn, most disappointingly and sadly, Israel has visited a similar oppression on the Palestinians. Where the peace offers as the West Bank is continuously usurped? Where is the hand held out in friendship with Gaza as it has no autonomy? people live their entire lives never leaving that little strip of land.

Hamas was elected in 2008. There has not been another election allowed since. Hamas is not one thing. There is a body that endeavors to govern, there is a charitable arm, and there is a militant wing. Israel will punish the entire community and not differentiate. I believe that they are lobbing shells and dropping bombs to the maximum extent they believe they can get away with in the eyes of the world community. If Egypt would allow it, they would drive all 2 million Gazans into the Sinai. When has Israel ever treated the Palestinians any better?

Not since WWII has there been such carpet bombing of civilians, and at that time there was truly an existential threat. The IDF is the 4th largest military in the world and Israel is NOT fighting for it's life. Where are the Seal Team equivalents performing surgical strikes?

Israel hasn't been "carpet bombing." If you're alluding to Dresden, allied bombers killed 25,000 people in barely two days - with fewer sorties over an area with a fraction of the population density of Gaza. If Israel were bombing indiscriminately and actually trying to blanket all of Gaza, the casualties would be vastly higher.

As I've mentioned in our past conversations, the reason you don't have "Seal Team" equivalents is because those tactical operations are useful if you're trying to take out a very small number of people - not when you're in combat against tens of thousands of belligerents. In those types of conflict situations, you're in a military combat, not a small-unit special operations team. That means infantry with air support, not special ops.

Nor do I believe you're correct that Israel isn't fighting for its life. If Hamas can launch this kind of attack, and not face any response because they are in a densely populated area, then Hamas (and others) will know that they will always and forever be able to launch such attacks without effective reprisals. This is asymmetric warfare. The way Israel is destroyed isn't by a superior Palestinian military force overcoming the IDF - any more than other large powerful militaries were "defeated" in Afghanistan and Iraq and Vietman and a host of other places. Asymmetric warfare is won by the weaker force inflicting enough cost that the stronger force isn't willing to keep up the fight. In Israel's case, that would be Hamas and Hezbollah being successful enough in terrorizing the population to the point of not feeling safe enough, over a long enough time, to the point where they aren't able to maintain a large and powerful military.

Witness the cruelty of cutting off water and power to starve the Gazan people of sustenance and medical care. How is this justifiable?

Because it's a justifiable tactic to cut of resources to opposing belligerents - not simply justifiable, but common to the point of being nearly universal. When facing an enemy force, a top military priority is to try to cut off their supplies. Food, water, fuel, munitions, heavy equipment - all things that are important to stop in order to degrade the fighting capabilities of an enemy force.

If an enemy force embeds itself within a civilian population, it becomes impossible to cut off their access to resources without severely hurting - or eliminating - the ability of the civilian population to get access to such resources. The way the laws of war deal with this is by forbidding combatants from deliberately embedding themselves within civilian populations - not by prohibiting the other forces from trying to cut them off from supplies. For example:

One view, based on the wording of the prohibition in Article 54 AP I and, in particular, on its framing of the practice ‘as a method of warfare’, is that only the deliberate starvation of civilians is prohibited.39 A number of military manuals appear to support this interpretation.40 Additional support for this narrow interpretation comes from the wording of Article 54(2) AP I, which sets out an example of a violation of the prohibition of starvation, and refers to the destruction of objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population ‘for the specific purpose of denying them for their sustenance value to the civilian population’ (emphasis added).

https://www.chathamhouse.org/2019/06/sieges-law-an...

You get into assessments of proportionality if you have a complete encirclement of a civilian population - but the military objective of depriving Hamas of food, water, fuel, power and equipment, given the likely effect on their capacity as a fighting force, is pretty significant. Hamas has no other supply lines - they can't continue fighting and defending their military infrastructure if they remain isolated.

The consequences of the current actions, despite the rhetoric of the press releases, is needless cruelty and death with yet again displacement of Palestinians from, and destructions of their homes. It is inexcusable and it is a war crime, if this slaughter can be called a war.

It is not a war crime. The rules of war do not allow a belligerent party to gain immunity from attack simply by being successful enough at interposing a civilian population between themselves and the other belligerent. Such interposition itself is a war crime - it does not render the other belligerent engaging in normal acts of war into a war crime, despite the suffering of the civilian population. It imposes some obligations on the other belligerent...but those obligations do not translate into having to cease military operations in order to avoid hurting the civilian population. Remember - the purpose of these rules is to disincentivize belligerents from putting civilians in harm's way. If embedding yourself in a civilian population gives you an enormous advantage by forcing your enemy to completely disengage, then you will be much more likely to do it. Which is why military forces never consider the laws of war to require them to disengage.

In turn, most disappointingly and sadly, Israel has visited a similar oppression on the Palestinians.

That oppression is defensive; not out of hatred for the average Joe inhabiting the Gaza strip. Israel needed to stop the growing frequency of attacks on Israel.

The USA would do the same thing if Mexico had been launching missiles at Corpus Christi, sending suicide bombers into US border cities, and suddenly attacked San Diego and South Padre island, slaughtering thousands of spring breakers.

If Egypt would allow it, they would drive all 2 million Gazans into the Sinai.

Egypt isn't stupid. They don't want Hamas operating out of Egypt.

albaby1

Dresden was technically fire bombed, as was Tokyo. The casualties were unimaginably high, and it is debated to this day whether there was any strategic or tactical value in that operation. I agree that Israel needs to do something to recover its citizens, but I can't disagree more with the current plan. The fruit born from this approach is likely to opposite to the intended goal. Remember that Hezbollah did not form until after Israel occupied Lebanon.

Additionally, the death count of innocents is unacceptably and immorally high. I also can't see how starving the population of food, water, medication, and electricity furthers the effort to recover hostages. It is all unspeakably cruel and suggests an ongoing callous disregard for the wellbeing and indeed, humanity of Palestinians.

You can't call this a war as there is no Palestinian State! The militant wing of Hamas is a terrorist organization representing no one.
They are thugs, organized crime. The Gazans are Israeli subjects. They get nothing more than they are allowed.

If the Gazans can be punished generally for "aiding and abetting", why should Palestinians behave any differently toward Israeli citizens. This will lead to a resurgence of bombs on busses and suicide bombers. Half of the populace of Gaza are children for goodness sake.

I don't have any idea what the solution immediately or generally to this conflict would be, but this aint it.

I agree that Israel needs to do something to recover its citizens, but I can't disagree more with the current plan. The fruit born from this approach is likely to opposite to the intended goal.

Again, that's just not true.

Israel's intended goal is to eliminate Hamas as an organization that has the capacity, resources, experienced personnel, and operational infrastructure to commit the type of atrocity that took place on 10/7. This approach is the "least bad" method of achieving that goal. Because Hamas is embedded within the civilian population, there is no way to accomplish this goal without having horrible levels of civilian casualties. But the military option is the one that's most likely to achieve it.

Additionally, the death count of innocents is unacceptably and immorally high. I also can't see how starving the population of food, water, medication, and electricity furthers the effort to recover hostages.

Recovering hostages isn't the primary goal. It's certainly an important goal, to be sure. But the primary goal is destroying everything that Hamas has that gives it the capability to perform the 10/7 attacks. Because of Hamas' actions in embedding itself into the civilian population, there's no way to do that without a high civilian death count.

I understand lamenting the high civilian death count - but you have to ask the next question. If Israel doesn't meaningfully try to destroy Hamas, what then? Is the result that Hamas' tactic of embedding itself among civilian works - that they're able to perpetrate the greatest atrocity against the Jewish people since the Holocaust, and then be immune? That's a recipe for a never-ending string of 10/7's, over and over, until Israel falls. Not only from Hamas - if Gaza is a perfect "human shield" against reprisals, preventing Israel from routing any group that attacks them, then you can expect Iran (and possibly Russia) to flood that area with resources for all who want to bring the fight against Israel.

That's also an unacceptable outcome.

There's no magic third alternative. The IDF doesn't have superpowers, some incredible capability that would allow them to defeat the de facto government with a paramilitary force of tens of thousands that has spent nearly two decades building up its organization and infrastructure using "surgical strikes." To meaningfully degrade Hamas' capabilities requires boots on the ground with air support. As we have seen in conflict after conflict, no matter the belligerents, that always involves high levels of civilian deaths when the fighting is in urban areas.

There's no way to decimate Hamas without the civilian casualties. So do you really believe that Israel would ever choose not to decimate Hamas, despite the civilian casualties? Do you believe any country would choose not to decimate Hamas, if they were in that situation? Is that what you think Israel should do - refrain from destroying Hamas because of the civilian casualties?

al

This is my last post on the subject as we are not going to agree on anything. But your last question to me that the only choice Israel faces is to bomb children, kill more or less indiscriminately, destroy hospitals or schools or roll over to Hamas, That is a logical fallacy.

And how much of Hamas has been destroyed so far? I heard something about a senior commander being the reason for killing 200 additional Palestinians. There have already been more deaths in a week than in the entire struggle for Irish independence.

The bombings are the greatest recruiting tool for Hamas imaginable. After seeing your loved ones blown up, burned, or buried, how would you respond? But if the intent of the campaign is to drive people out of north Gaza, well, mission accomplished.

signing off

fd

This is my last post on the subject as we are not going to agree on anything.

I'm sorry to hear that. I've enjoyed our discussions. And I generally believe that the value of conversations like this is not in trying to get another person to agree with you, but to gain a better understanding of their perspectives. Even if it doesn't change your mind, you can at least get a more accurate sense of where they're coming from.

One of the things that I've tried over and over to emphasize is that Israel does not believe that their current actions will lead to a good outcome. Just that they will lead to the least bad outcome. If this is the end of our conversation, my regret is that you don't seem to be picking up on that distinction.

In your latest post, you note that the bombs are a great recruiting tool for Hamas. You're absolutely right. I don't think many in Israel would disagree.

But what I would love if you would consider - if you would just think about - is what the alternative looks like. If Israel doesn't significantly attack Hamas, what does that look like for Hamas' recruiting?

I think the answer is obvious. If Hamas was able to successfully pull of 10/7 without being all-but-destroyed by Israel, it is the greatest recruiting tool for Hamas that could ever exist. Much better than the bombs. Hamas will have demonstrated to the Palestinians - and to the greater Arab world - that it could kill a thousand Jews, force Israel to de facto cede territory within the Green Line to create a buffer zone, reallocate their military focus away from the WB, and put the Palestinian conflict back on the world's top priority list.....without paying a price? They'd be the biggest rock stars in the Middle East. You couldn't stop people from lining up to join Hamas.

Remember, to a first approximation the Palestinian people (and the many Arab states as well) have been torn between two conflicting approaches to Israel. One approach = embodied by the late-era PLO, the PA, and Fatah - is to pursue an accommodation with the existence of Israel through peaceful means. The other approach chooses violence - Hamas (and others like the PIJ, the PLFP, Hizbollah, etc.) argue that there will never be a Palestinian state except through violence, and that violence can make the Palestinian state the only state and drive the Jews into the sea.

If Hamas is able to commit 10/7 and survive, they will have proven that their approach works. That you can commit any level of violence against the Israelis, and it will neither spread into a wider war nor result in your organization being destroyed. They will have proven that human shields work. Proof of concept to the Iranians and Russians, and all the Arabs in the region, that the Hamas approach can and will work. With enough time, resources, and volunteers you can make people in Israel feel so unsafe that they can't continue the Israeli project - and Israel will never, never be able to push back hard enough to make you stop.

That's what Israel is trying to accomplish. They know there's no way to prosecute this war without killing Palestinian civilians, and that killing Palestinian civilians is an effective recruiting tool. They're not idiots, and they're not naive. They're trying to make sure that Hamas doesn't become the most effective terrorist group in the history of fighting Israel, knowing what that would entail.

Hamas's approach IS working.

Look what they 've always done.

At a time, Israel offered all sots of concessions (see Arafat and Ehud B)


Hamas just did something ---- parts of it I can't even write about.

And the very next morning - elite, enlightened places around the West came out Pro-Pal.

Hamas's approach is working.

Vanish Hamas today.

Their cause and sympathizers will rise up tomorrow.

Hamas's approach is working.

Post New

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.