Posted more as an update to Mobius’ Mishegaas blurb.
Olmert: “We were attacked by a sovereign country”

Security officials said if the soldiers are not returned safe Lebanon will pay a heavy price as Israel will turn the country’s clock back 50 years. The IDF has taken measures to call up reserve soldiers in preparation for a wide-scale operation in southern Lebanon.
The kid gloves appear to be officially off.
“It is an act of war by the state of Lebanon against the state of Israel in its sovereign territory,” he told a news conference.

This is bad.
Not just from a logistical standpoint, because Israel does not have a good track record in Lebonon. The international fallout from this is going to be intense. And it doesn’t matter who started it – Israel is expected to take it on the chin, and will be blamed for whatever carnage spills out. Syria will use its Hezbollah proxies without ever actually engaging Israel, Israel is retaliating on what most people considers a weaker country, and still Gaza burns.
These are bad times.
My prayers go out to Eretz Y’israel and to the innocents caught in this meat grinder.

46 thoughts on “War

  1. This is summertime Monk. Everybody is on a vacation or outside enjoying the sun. Israel basically has carte blance. I suggest they use it.

  2. I AM a former-muslim. One that has seen the truth of Torah because through the magic of the internet I got to see the Jewish perspective. It’s amazing how much “borrowing” has been going on in the qur’an from rabbinical sources. Once you see that it’s hard to go back.

  3. what are you worried about? one of Olmert’s aides said this last night:
    The aide added that the realignment concept is gathering momentum also due to the international community’s reaction to operation “Summer Rains” in Gaza.
    “We are acting there in an unprecedented manner; we’re firing hundreds of artillery shells, attacking from the air, sea and land and the world remains silent,” he said.
    see? the world dont give one darn.

  4. I read in very few places, but I can’t confirm in any major news outlet that the two soldiers are Druze. I think the absolute majority of people in Western countries has never heard of the Druze religion, and would be very surprised to learn about them and their military service in Israel.

  5. xisntox, is that quote for real? can you post the link? thanks

    xisntox’s quote can be found in this story:,7340,L-3273710,00.html
    Note that if you take a unique phrase from a quote like this (such as “attacking from the air, sea and land”) and put it into Google News in quotation marks, you’ll almost always find the original story–if it exists.

  6. Jeez, for a guy who goes by the name “Monk Eastman,” you sure sound like a wuss. There’s an asskicking in order here. Let it get done.

    Jul. 12, 2006 17:40
    Yesha rabbis call for ‘extermination of the enemy’
    The Yesha Rabbinical Council blamed the attack on the north on Wednesday morning on a “weakening of our grip on the land of Israel.”
    The rabbis saw the attack as a “direct continuation of relinquishing [territory] and weakness.”
    The Council called on the IDF to ignore Christian morals and “exterminate the enemy in the north and the south.” They advised that an emergency government be established to “fight the true enemy as is appropriate, and to rescind orders to destroy and evict Jews.”

  8. Monk…we get enough moral relativism from The Guardian. The rabbis are responding to a direct provocation, an attack on Israel proper.
    The raison d’etre may be whacky, but their timing is sound. I see a difference between their claims and say, Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad. You don’t?

  9. Save it shtreimel. Monk would much rather go into a looong monologue about how Israel is so much more moral than the arabs because it refuses to fight back and allows arabs to murder Jews with impunity. Just look at the opinion pages on, same thing.
    The idea that a nation fights for their country is foreign to them at best and “primitive” at worst. Not having a state for 2000 years they forgot what a nation must do sometimes just to survive. And if anyone reminds them, he is “bloodthirsty” or violent.

  10. Ok.
    Formermuslim? I’ve been asked to play nice, so I’ll politely say ‘get the fuck outta here.”
    I am Zionist, I believe in the sanctity of Israel as a state for jews – but I do not celebrate war or endorse it is as a primary vehicle for international relations.
    Does that mean sometimes a motherfucker needs to be smacked in the mouth?
    Absolutely. And that’s what’s happening now – in Lebanon and Gaza.
    Am I going to do a little happy dance over it?
    Hell the fuck NO. And anyone who DOES celebrate that kind of destruction and death shouldn’t be balling themselves Jews. Actions of this kind don’t become works of glee – they must be taken solemnly and with the basic understanding of human costs. To weigh the moral value of life is the duty of every Jew – especially in the face of crisis. Otherwise, we might as well take the morally absolute perspective of the Christians and Muslims, who can justify all their actions through faith alone. If we suffer ethically for our defense, then it is necessary suffering. That is the fate of Israel: to wrestle with G_d and the laws given.
    And the Yesha’s raison d’etre IS the basis of my statement. Bolstering a politically tense situation with religious vitriol towards the government’s land policies is hardly appropriate – no matter the timing. Especially when they’ve yet to offer a viable alternative.

  11. “Hell the fuck NO. And anyone who DOES celebrate that kind of destruction and death shouldn’t be balling themselves Jews.”
    I’ll be the first JEW on Jewschool to celebrate the kind of destruciton and death the IDF is able, and has, delivered. I understand what those Apaches, Merkavas, and Special Op units are for…you know, the same one’s we take pictures of…onbirthright…or a federation trip. So when a target is hit with planning and precision, and Jewish lives are saved, I celebrate.

  12. Shtriemel.
    From a nationalist viewpoint, I appreciate your point of view. No one should be apologist for seeing their landsmen safe.
    From a religious and humanist perspective, your stance makes me a little sick.

  13. “From a religious and humanist perspective, your stance makes me a little sick.”
    Curious, do you bring an air-sickness bag with you to shul? ‘Cause, depending on the Torah reading, there are more than a few things that would make you hurl. So dont’ throw around that holier than though Michael Lerner/Tikkun “religious” shtick. It ain’t Judaism, it may be the b side of a Lennon single, but it ain’t Judaism.

  14. The point is, we don’t even celebrate the death of our enemies. Necessary? Unfortunately, yes. But it is NOT something to celebrate or be happy or take satisfaction in.

  15. Shtriemel.
    Clearly, you’re right.
    Jews aren’t supposed to consider the morality of our actions.
    Jews aren’t intended to consider the immediate, real world consequences of our decisions.
    And Jews are certainly not consider mercy and lovingkindness as traits to aspire to.
    We’re a warrior people. Let’s jettison the academia and get on with bombing the happy horseshit out of anyone who flaunts us. Shit, break out the white label vodka – I may just start dancing?
    No disrespect?
    But I don’t know any sect of our faith that considers death as being without ethical implications. Judaism exists by design – it is not something we make up as we go along. Our ethical mechanisms are designed specifically for us to function in the real world with all its ugliness, and balance the high-minded righteousness of Judaism with mundane pragmatism . And yes, I believe that if it is in Israel’s best interest to survive, then they should bomb the holy hellfire out of anything that would threaten. That’s the animal fear of a human nationalist at work. But the Jew says we do not kill without the understanding that it affects us as much as the dead, and that there are consequences to it.
    The Dialogue is the essence of Judaism.
    So we’re going to either agree to disagree, or…

  16. Monk…we actually agree. And I enjoyed your last comment. But I’d be a liar if I said that I shed tears for victims of appropriate IDF response. Perhaps we disagree on degree, and not intent.

  17. Best line of this thread is: It ain’t Judaism, it may be the b side of a Lennon single. I’m going to steal that!

  18. “I am Zionist, I believe in the sanctity of Israel as a state for jews – but I do not celebrate war or endorse it is as a primary vehicle for international relations. ”
    Wow Monk, you’re so special and unique. One of those few people who doesn’t like war.
    Give me a break monk. You say you don’t like war but refuse to do that which would end it. Namely, win! And for what reason? I”l tell you what the reason is, I’ve been on enough of these hipster judaism websites to know the answer by now. You are afraid that if you piss of the “world” too much they (america europe whoever) won’t support you anymore or in the case of europe won’t look the other way occasionaly.
    That is the ONLY reason Israel is holding back. Your humanist values stop you from celebrating war you say? Your humanist values are the reason this war is still going on. Killing palestinians every day, telling yourself that they’re just terrorsts so it’s okay morally. Well they wouldn’t be terrorists and they wouldn’t be there if you had thrown them out to Jordan or syria or whatever country the arabs have in their collection.
    But you won’t throw them out Monk like your G-d told you in the Torah. And what would happen when you don’t throw them out? “They will become thorns in your side”. This is your holy scripture talking Monk. You have no-one to blame but yourself. The UN condemns you, europe sells you out? Well guess what Monk. You’re a nation that walks alone, sound familiar? You appearently see that as a curse.
    It’s too bad the orthodox are a minority in the Jewish world. They are the only who take their scripture seriously and as a result are the only ones capable of seeing what’s going on in the world: That G-d is pulling the ropes and Hizbullah and Hamas are the puppets.

  19. I completely agree Monk. We don’t rejoice in what we have to do. When Israel is attacked, it has the responsibility to strike back in appropriate measures. We strike back, but we don’t enjoy it. It’s not fun to learn that ordinary Palestinians, regardless of their politics, are dying and starving. If we enjoy watching this, then we are just letting our thirst for revenge get the best of us (plus there is something wrong with us). Israel must fight off its enemies in the interest of justice and protecting its citizens.
    There are people who rejoice in our downfall, but we don’t stoop to their level. My personal belief is that we can set an example for them. Yeah I know, it’s very wishful thinking. So I’m a blind optimist.

  20. Monk and Shtriemel:
    You both seem to be assuming that only one response is appropriate upon the occurrence of a given event. Why? Aren’t our Shabbats and holidays complex mixtures of different emotions and moods? Shabbat is the time for both serious contemplation AND some material indulgence (in the prescribed forms, of course). Holidays are joyful but also serious commemorations of events. Purim is a blow-out but contains undercurrents of fear. Yom Kippur is solemn and even terrifying, yet is also supposed to be a day of joy. Why shouldn’t the same apply when attacking enemies? On these occasions I feel a some sadness (a) because of any innocents that might have been harmed, though I may fully condone or demand the attack and (b) in the case of the harmed guilty, because though my side has done nothing wrong and in fact is required to defend itself, the necessity of such attacks is a reminder that we live in a broken world. And at the same time, I celebrate the death of the guilty, because the world is better off without them, because they will never commit their crimes again, because justice has been served, and because it’s too rare that the good people are publicly seen to have beaten the bad ones.
    So when Saddam and bin Laden earn their final reward, I’ll be breaking out a bottle of fine whiskey (both bottles already purchased). I’ll have a drink to commemorate their victims and to reflect quietly on the inherent sadness in the world. Then I’ll pour another drink, cheer loudly, wish them a happy eternity in hell, smile broadly and bottoms up! And both of you, literally or figuratively, should be joining me in this.
    And Monk-
    “And anyone who DOES celebrate that kind of destruction and death shouldn’t be balling themselves Jews. ” –
    you GOTTA fix that typo. 🙂

  21. Yup, I’m afraid the comments here stand as an unambiguous rebuke to that part of the post which states, “This is bad.” It’s time to acknowledge the simple truth, that THIS IS PRECISELY WHAT THE ISRAELI RIGHT WANTS. This state of war is not only the sole possible outcome of a policy of extreme Rightwing nationalism, but it is exactly the outcome they’ve been hoping for. Indeed, the only criticism at all is directed at the fact that there is any hesitation or reluctance whatever toward a policy of killing civilians on a mass scale. Here’s a quick selection of comments from a recent post on the kidnapping that provoked the incursion into Gaza:
    not so many words needed : kill them all, turn off the water, turn off the power, and start shooting.
    carpet bomb Khan Yunis. Turn it into a smoking crater. Tell them they have 24 hours to completely give up any and all belief in “Armed Struggle” or we’ll do the same thing to the next town, chosen at random.
    Idea: lets see if the “push them into the ocean” thing works, we will do it in the name of helping Hammas and Iran. I suppose Ashkelon is a good port of entry. We can have gunboats out there directing them to swim towards egypt.

    Of course, the Right is likely to be a good deal less enthusiastic about the fallout that inevitably will result from such a policy, including worldwide political condemnation, diplomatic and cultural isolation, economic boycott, financial divestment, impoverishment, and designation as a pariah state. But not to worry, the Right will simply find a way – as they always do – to blame someone else, or to simply stick their heads in the sand and respond with some non sequitur.

  22. Smith, Israel has a policy of never leaving a soldier behind. Every soldier must make it back alive, and if God forbid one is killed, his body is taken with the unit. I highly doubt that anyone in the Israeli govt has enjoyed seeing pictures of Israeli boys who have been captured by terrorists while performing their national duty. And why in God’s name do you think that Israel is supporting the PLO right now?
    And where did you get those obviously fabricated quotes? Stormfront? You’re an idiot.

  23. Ay. Smitty. Your post reads like conspiracy theory 101.
    Need I remind you of the death toll of First Lebanon?
    Need I remind you these momzers are better armed 20 years later?
    That shy of nuking everyone, there is no real tactical victory here?
    And that using a nuke in a crowded area like the Middle East would kill most of Israel?
    It’s a weak argument.

  24. Smoot:
    You’re a real credit to whatever cave you and your fellow grunting savages bed down in, as well as the Learning Annex class where you learned critical thinking and the rules of intellectual engagement. As far as the obviously fabricated quotes, the first two are Comment #’s 5 and 9 of a 6/25/06 Jewlicious post at 3:16 a.m. while the third is Comment #2 of another Jewlicious post from 6/29/06 at 3:27 a.m. Of course, I realize that mind-numbing ignorance can be a bit frustrating at times, so no need for an apology; why not just go home and give your kids an extra beating tonight.
    I actually think the argument is quite sound, and given the fact that you were able to address me without disgusting accusations or personal insults, I’d be delighted to expound upon why I think so. But I honestly don’t recognize what you think is faulty about it (I’m not familiar with smh, and I have no idea where the notion of dropping a nuke comes from). In any case, my point was that the quotes are genuinely representative of the views of the Jewish rightwing (as a review of the referenced Jewlicious posts indicates); they expose the fallacy that there would be peace if only the Palestinians would stop waging war against Israel. I think it’s clear that the Israeli Right wants war as much as the Palestinians do, and that they NEVER have any answers for the assorted consequences I listed in my original post. If you explain what you meant, I can certainly describe why that’s the case.

  25. David Smith,
    I don’t think the comments you cited are indicative in any way of the Israeli right. The extreme right, maybe, but the extreme right is not calling the shots now.
    This state of war you mentioned was insitgated not by the Israeli right but by armies in areas from which Israel has withdrawn.
    In brief, there were war-like actions perpetrated against Israel by genocidal Islamo-fascists on two fronts, with support from outside totalitarian regimes that openly call for Israel’s destruction. Their twisted death-cult perspective interprets silence as weakness and as a call to further violence. What do you think Israel should do in response?

  26. Monk and Shtreimel – Yes, that’s right, Jews do what is necessary to deter and vanquish their enemies – but we don’t glory in killing or seek it out.
    Now – could someone please go back to the “Statement by Yesha Rabbis” that sparked this discussion, and tell me exactly WHERE those Rabbis “gloried” in death?
    They are certainly not the only people drawing the obvious connections between Barak’s tail-between-legs withdrawal from Lebanon, and the subsequent boldness of Hamas and Hizbullah in their actions against us.
    It’s now a common observation that our overtures for peace were seen as weakness, and that the Intifadas were inspired by Hizbullah’s successful war of attrition against Israel in Lebanon.
    And I know this may come as a shock – but Israel has certainly not invented the notion that a country can annex territories from which it is repreatedly attacked, dispossessing enemy populations in the process. This is actually Standard Operating Procedure in most conflicts that descent to armed conflict (and how the India-Pakistan border was established, to cite one relevant example).
    So – while “everybody knows” that those Rabbis are uncool, square, not hip – the past 2 weeks have proven a lot of square, uncool, unhip right-wing opinion correct.

  27. EV;
    An absolutely valid question, to which I have what strikes me as a rather accommodating reply: whatever you want. Though I’d quibble with totalitarian, death-cult seems pretty damn accurate, and, for argument’s sake, let’s concede that the current situation has resulted entirely from unprovoked aggression by the Palestinians. Accordingly, I’ll leave it up to those professionals with a better tactical understanding than mine as to how Israel ought to respond to dissuade the repetition of such attacks in the future.
    And now, perhaps you can answer the question: What does Israel do AFTER the resolution of this incident, or the four or five or six such incidents after that? Assuming the Palestinians are the barbaric savages we’re constantly told they are, there’s obviously no reason to imagine they’re about to simply accept the status quo and relinquish all future attacks.
    The central claim of apologists for the Right is that Israel would embrace peace if the only the Palestinians would renounce all future provocations such as those currently at issue. That’s fiction. If it’s not, then explain the terms upon which this cycle of violence and retaliation is conceivably to come to an end.
    Let’s assume you’re right, EV, that those on the Right advocating mass murder aren’t calling the shots at the moment, and that policy is instead shaped by moderates such as Ben-David who call for the annexation of the occupied territories and parts of Lebanon, and the mass expulsion of millions of Palestinians.
    Leaving aside all arguments as to the morality of such a policy, the LEAST that will happen is that Israel will become every bit as much a pariah state as South Africa or North Korea. I’d love to hear somebody describe how Israel is going to deal with that state of affairs, besides the Right’s constant refrain that “they started it.”

  28. That is the fundamental problem; no war in which two opposing ideals clash has ever ended until there was a clearcut winner and loser. And fundamentally that is at the root of why there are still Arab-Israeli conflicts, namely Israel has yet to be accepted as part of the permanent map in the region versus Israel’s desire to actually be on that map. And sure there are individual states who have recognized that right (Egypt, Jordan), but until a Palestinian leadership comes to power that recognizes the hard and true fact that Israel will continue to exist no matter what they want/do/say, those two fundamental opposing views will continue to be in conflict.

  29. I really wonder about people sometimes.
    David Smith says:
    “I think it’s clear that the Israeli Right wants war as much as the Palestinians do, and that they NEVER have any answers for the assorted consequences I listed in my original post.”
    There goes the Right, without answers. But when asked what Israel should do about constant Arab provocation and killing, what does our Mr. Smith say?
    “Accordingly, I’ll leave it up to those professionals with a better tactical understanding than mine as to how Israel ought to respond to dissuade the repetition of such attacks in the future. ”
    That’s it? We just leave it to the experts? Why isn’t the Right afforded the opportunity to out-source its answeres to “professionals”? And if it’s all in the hands of “professionals”, why does Smith bother posting at all?
    And I would expect an expert in “critical thinking and the rules of intellectual engagement” to know better than to try to prove a point about a large and diverse group of people such as the Right by trolling the web for a few comments on blogs. Anyone can “prove” anything that way.
    “I’d love to hear somebody describe how Israel is going to deal with that state of affairs, besides the Right’s constant refrain that “they started it.” ”
    I’ll leave it up to those spin-doctors with a better tactical understanding of spin than mine …. 🙂
    I’d recommend spending less time trying to do an arrogant academic imitation (though the Learning Annex crack was funny) and more time trying to be coherent.

  30. J,
    You’ve misinterpreted my response, perhaps as a result of some vagueness on my part. By “whatever you want,” I absolutely was not evading making a commitment to a position. What I simply meant is that my criticism of the Right – regarding killing civilians and rejection of peace – was not based on the harsh and punitive nature of the Israeli response to these specific acts of aggression, and that I am entirely willing to concede the legitimacy of such punitive measures in this circumstance, even if they do result in the widespread loss of civilian life. I was being quite literal, i.e., I acknowledge the legitimacy of any position that the military authorities state is necessary as a tactical response to this specific threat.
    My objection pertains to strategy, not tactics.
    You are also correct that I didn’t outline my own strategic response to this impasse. It’s not because I don’t have one, but because I was waiting first to see if EV or anybody else could tell me how the Right is prepared to deal with the state of affairs I’ve previously described. I do, indeed, have a very specific strategy that I believe constitutes the single possible position that assures Israel’s continued survival, one that I am willing to defend in every particular. The reason I didn’t identify that position in my last comment is that I know it will immediately become the object of scorn and derision, thus permitting the Right to once again avoid taking an affirmative stance of any kind. I will gladly outline and defend my own proposed strategy, but I would like to see first if there is anyone who supports either – as EV puts it – the far Right (mass civilian killings) or the moderate Right (annexation and mass expulsion) who can describe how these proposals will actually work on the ground.
    As to my arrogance, incoherence, and stereotyping of the Right, I’ll address those matters separately.

  31. it’s not judaism. it may be the appendix to the complete works of machiaveilli, but it ain’t judaism.

  32. You’ve still got it all wrong, Smith. Do you really think that you’re so much more wise fand worldly or simplifying recent events to part of some grand scheme by a group of old men in high government posts with their own destructive agenda? Just pure conspiracy. Same thing with your characterization of the “moderate right.” There are people on the extreme right who advocate mass expulsion of the Palestinians or even extermination, in some cases. But those positions aren’t tolerated. There are right wing politicians who fall within a normal accepted political spectrum, but their views are a bit more grounded than you say. Just about all the time, suggestions that the Israeli right (e.g. Likud) is really plotting behind the scenes to get rid of the Palestinians amount to mere speculation. I know, don’t believe every official statement you hear. But don’t believe baseless speculative comments either.
    While your cute little joke about the learning annex may have made you look slightly intelligent, that must have definitely been a surprise to those who had read your ludicrous comments that triggered my response.

  33. And what about calling me an idiot and accusing me of fabricating quotes; is that something you’re defending as well?
    Let me ask you a question: Do you have any interest in participating in a genuine exchange of ideas – even those with which you completely disagree – or do you want to limit the discussion to those who tell you how right and smart and well-intentioned you are? If your answer is the former, then I think you’d have to concede that your comment to me was hardly conducive to a meaningful and civil discussion.
    The reason for my extreme frustration was less your comment – which frankly struck me more as expression of reflexive irritability than an intentional slander – than a pattern of conduct that has gone a long way toward turning too many discussions on this blog into cesspools of ignorance and futility. That’s what I was referring to when I mentioned the rules of intellectual engagement. One revealing example is the current post “Rabbinical Student Reports from Palestine,” expressing sympathy for the Palestinians. While some of those on the Right have offered actual arguments, a number of others have accused those agreeing with the post of supporting Nazis, committing treason, and being self-hating Jews like Chomsky, not to mention the usual odious shtick of the Punctuation King, who in place of any actual arguments substitutes slimy insulations consisting of italics, acronyms, capital letters, and cretinous jargon.
    This bullshit has got to stop if there is any hope whatever of restoring some kind civility and value to these discussions. The only solution, it seems to me, is for those on both sides of the argument to police the remarks of those who share their views, and to censure those comments when they are libelous, irrelevant or simply cross the line of common decency.
    As to the substance of my position, I actually went back to look at my comment to see if there was something I’d forgotten that might account for the intensity of the vitriol and animosity it provoked. There wasn’t. The essence of my claim consisted of three points:
    1. The Israeli (and Jewish) Right doesn’t want peace any more than the Palestinian extremists;
    2. The current state of war is the inevitable consequence of their extreme nationalist policies; and
    3. Israel will be rendered a pariah state as a result of these policies.
    First, I should note that I never said anything about there being any conspiracy in the Israeli government to further the rightwing agenda, and don’t believe that any such conspiracy exists. Moreover, while these claims are obviously arguable, they’re hardly ludicrous. Disturbing and shocking, no doubt; but ludicrous? You, yourself, were so disgusted by the quotes I excerpted that you automatically assumed they had to be fake. You can hardly fail to recognize the significance of that assumption. You said,
    There are people on the extreme right who advocate mass expulsion of the Palestinians or even extermination, in some cases. But those positions aren’t tolerated.
    I’m sorry, but your dismissal strikes me as being far closer to ludicrous than my claim that such views are accurately representative of the Right as a whole. Could I be wrong about that? Of course. But if so, it’s not because I’ve selected a few isolated quotes in order, as J accused, “to prove a point about a large and diverse group of people such as the Right by trolling the web for a few comments on blogs.” In response to the Jewlicious posts I referenced, for example, at least one-third of the 25 or so people commenting on the two stories expressed views exactly like those I quoted. It seems to me if those on the Right are truly scandalized and offended by such extremism, as you were, then they must assume some responsibility for demonstrating that “those views aren’t tolerated.” The problem, though, is precisely that such views are tolerated. Even if the beliefs of the mainstream Right “fall within a normal accepted political spectrum” and “are a bit more grounded,” as you say, it is exceedingly rare during a discussion about Israel for anyone on the Right to condemn the paranoia and moral degeneracy of those who routinely call for mass murder and wholesale ethnic cleansing.
    For me, THIS IS A MATTER OF SIMPLE ACCOUNTABILITY, of taking responsibility for the rhetoric used by one’s political allies.

  34. David Smith appears to be sane–the rest of you people strike me as being as fanatical and terrorist as those you hold to be your enemies.
    Is this the point to which the fanatical religious docterine of Zionism has taken you?
    With this thinking it won’t just be Iran that is turned into a nuclear wasteland–but Isreal too.
    You learned nothing from the genocide perpetrated by Hitler and the fanatical Aryans–except to monkey their behavior. Your righteous anscestors are turning in their graves.
    Shame on you.

  35. Smith, I’m not offended by anything you said. You can say that the Jews were behind the WTC plot for all I care. You’re kind of jumping the gun and assuming that I am just like all those other Jews who label those with whom they disagree as Nazis or anti-Semites or whatever. I don’t label; I dismiss. I just felt that your comments were a bit too speculative and they mischaracterized the right by exaggerating its rhetoric. It just seems too much like anti-right paranoia that I’ve seen before.
    Now excuse me as I have to go gas some Palestinians as we Jews come closer to realizing the vision of an Arab-rein Middle East. See, Sydney? The Nazis sure did teach us something! Fucking idiot.

  36. No, Smoot, I didn’t in any way assume you’re like those who dismiss their opponents as Nazis and anti-Semites. What I did do was try to be somewhat conciliatory, and draw an explicit distinction between your reaction — wrong though it was — and the personally abusive attcks of those you have characterized as non-mainstream extremists. I also suggested that discussions here would be beter served if we all spent more time on constructive engagement, and less on calling each other “fucking idiots.” Oh well, graciousness is a personal virtue, the value of which not everyone can appreciate.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

The reCAPTCHA verification period has expired. Please reload the page.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.