MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE by Michael Wolraich Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop |
The Independent reports: Israeli troops massed on the Gaza border last night, poised for a possible ground invasion as Israel launched a major military operation it said was designed “to severely impair the command and control chain of the Hamas leadership, as well as its terrorist infrastructure.”
Comments
Jaabari, 52, was killed on Wednesday along with an unnamed associate when their car was blown apart by an Israeli missile. Palestinians said nine people were killed, including a seven-year-old girl.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6U2ZQ0EhN4&feature=player_embedded
by A Guy Called LULU on Thu, 11/15/2012 - 11:48am
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article33036.htm
by A Guy Called LULU on Thu, 11/15/2012 - 11:55am
That's an interesting quote for you to choose lulu. Rockets have been raining down on Israel on a daily basis for weeks. And yet you, like the rest of the world, have been quiet as a church mouse. I don't know whether Israel should go into Gaza or not. But I do believe that Israel has the right to defend itself.
What typical blatant hypocrisy, courtesy of a guy who spread bullshit about the zionists being responsible for the deaths of Americans in Benghazi, and who thinks it's OK to explore when comparisons between Jews and Nazis are kosher.
You can have the last word and then some.
by Bruce Levine on Thu, 11/15/2012 - 12:21pm
What is obviously clear is that you hope any word you hear that you believe is critical of Israeli action is to be the last word. You want to shut it up.
What I posted is news. It is more important news by far than any other subject being discussed today at Dagblog. Try to make people ignore it if you wish. Try to shout it down with accusations against the character of anyone referring to it. That tactic may work, it has at other times in other circles.
You may be partially successful in stifling any criticism of Israeli actions here at Dagblog with your angry outbursts but I suspect that some readers are keeping an open mind and judging the news for themselves regardless their feelings about me and whether they think I am at best a blatant hypocrite or not. Maybe your point of view is the only legitimate one, but maybe not. Maybe calling names and saying that's all is fair, but maybe not.
What is happening in Gaza and the surrounding region is important to the world. When the world is moving closer to a major war, it is news. Israel is a prime actor in many of the various actions. Its actions are news. When they assassinate someone on a downtown street with a missile so powerful it kills innocent people in the surrounding area it is news. Those who wish may follow the links and see what it looks like. They can see the human results. The death and destruction might become a tiny bit less abstract. It might affect judgments and conclusions about our own countries similar actions. Maybe that will help in the long run, maybe not.
If you have other news you want heard then put it out. Mean while, screw you, Bslev.
by A Guy Called LULU on Thu, 11/15/2012 - 1:56pm
Oh come on lulu, you can do a little bit better than the standard, "you're just trying to stifle." I thought you had the riff down better. That's an old and tired trope. You need to be a little more creative than that.
by Bruce Levine on Thu, 11/15/2012 - 2:02pm
Saying that speech or opinions have been stifled is either true or false, but my use of the word "stifled" is not using it as a trope. I use the word "stifled" here exactly in accordance with its true meaning. Are you suggesting, by calling my statement an "old and tired trope" that no defenders of Israel have ever attempted to stifle criticism of it and often by unfounded attacks on the critic and often with bullshit charges including anti-Semitism? Maybe denying a truth obvious to most everybody who has paid attention is your idea of being creative. Maybe it isn't your fault though. Maybe you cannot do better than that. Maybe your ego-centric predicament allows nothing else.
I recall these words coming out of your smoking head not so long ago.
You seem to have the acquired same perverted vision, and maybe you feel threatened by a forest which is mostly just full of trees.
by A Guy Called LULU on Thu, 11/15/2012 - 11:47pm
I do feel threatened by people like you lulu, because I don't believe that you have objectivity in your heart when it comes to Jews as a People, as opposed to individual Jews. I think you have a very warped and dangerous view of my People. And, you're right, I don't trust you for one friggin' second--other than the fact that you're an anonymous avatar who spreads poison but might in reality be nothing more than a neutered puppy in a basement with a bottle.
P.S. I mean why, under any definition of fairness or historical reality, should I be required to give you the benefit of the doubt lulu. Seriously, why do you deserve that? You spread the most vile speculation without any consideration of the historical significance of what you spread about Zionists being responsible for dead Americans in Libya. Why do you deserve understanding or the benefit of the doubt, particularly when you also think it's OK to explore when it's OK to compare Jews to Nazis. Do you have any idea how perverse that is? And if you don't, you're not some babe in the woods; lulu, you're a grown man. So I couldn't give a shit if you or anyone else thinks I'm unreasonable. What you think means nothing to me. The effect of what you think means a lot to me.
by Bruce Levine on Fri, 11/16/2012 - 8:24am
Bslev, you can relax, you do not need to feel threatened by me. My attitudes and beliefs will not affect the world situation one iota nor will they impinge on you and/or "'your people". That is true and will remain true even if your very mistaken judgments about my attitudes and beliefs were, in some parallel universe, found to be correct. And, you will never need to put your trust in me so you can relax on that point too.
As to your habit most every time you are mad at someone of making a big deal about how you bravely post with your real name while you infer that your target is a coward for using an anonymous avatar, get over it. The people you agree with also use an avatar, for the most part, and when the reasons for that are what the discussion is about you agree that there is often a good reason. So you might consider the fact that cheap shots get old pretty quick and soon you look like little more than a cheap shot artist.
I get as rude as just about anyone around here but I try to follow a rule of never saying something on line that I wouldn't say to a person's face. Maybe if we were talking face to face and we were both a bit angry you would hurl an insult like calling me "...nothing more than a neutered puppy in a basement with a bottle." Maybe you would say something like that to my face and maybe you would get away with it, but I have had enough physical confrontations in my life, [and yes, I have slinked away from a few of them because I thought I would get the juice pounded out of me if I didn't. How about you? Ever had someone push your nose over next to your ear? ] that I am not impressed by fighting words cast with all the bravado you exhibit from a thousand miles away, so why don't you put a lid on that faux macho crap, Bruce.
Bruce, may I call you Bruce, Bruce? you have told a few stories about your children and though you might not believe it, I believe that they are just as fine as you say and will be fine adults and a credit to their community and to their parents. That is maybe the only thing about which I care whether you believe me or not and that is only because I want to say a few things about my two children that I hope you believe.
First, though, something about me. I know that I am capable of holding unjust biases against a "people'. I know it because there was a period of some years when I did. During that period I did not like any Vietnamese person. I did not like their culture, I did not like their nasal sing-song voices, and I did not even like the looks of their most beautiful women. It wasn't an overt strong feeling, it wasn't always an active feeling by any means, it was just a general reaction when I saw one or when they were mentioned.
Nothing in my childhood and upbringing had predisposed me to holding such a prejudice, it's just that the Vietnamese and I had been trying to kill each other for a while and it took a while after that stopped to get over how successful they had been against so many of my friends.
When I had been home for about a year I drove to Baytown Texas to visit my best friend from the Magical Mystery Tour we had shared. He had gone home a bit before me and I didn't have any information with which to find him except the city he lived in. He had a somewhat unusual last name and I figured that would help in a small place which turned out to not be so small. I finally got hold of his dad whom I had met along with his mother and sister once at a club near Ft. Hood. His dad knew the place I was calling from and told me a beer joint close by where I could meet him. To make this part of my story a bit shorter I will recount one bit of of the conversation we had over a few cold ones. He said,"You know how Ralph was, the nicest boy anyone ever knew. Ralph got married soon after he got home, his wife lives with us now. Ralph is gone, we don't know where. We think he is in Houston. All we know about him now is that he is always angry. He is a different person. What happened to you guys over there?
I believe it was thinking about my lost friend, the lost one who was still alive, which set me to thinking why he had changed and what a sad thing that was. It helped me start looking at my own life. I came to realize that I had no reason to hate my previous enemy. They were not the ones responsible. As to who was responsible for the state, maybe the fate, of my friends, I shifted my blame to its rightful place, the people who callously cause, aid, or abet killing contrived enemies or real enemies that needn't be enemies but were made to be for some assholes big geo-political scheme. They still piss me off. I won't get over it and it is something I won't apologize for regardless who it offends. The scheming goes on and I sometimes speculate and other times I pay attention to the speculations of others. I'm not always perfectly accurate about who the bad guys are. Tough shit.
Back to my story. I had married too, maybe in a misguided attempt to get a normal life and it was by then too late for any personal change I might make to save that union, but that failure which was mostly my fault was another spur towards getting my shit together and not letting myself be a victim and not then victimizing those around me that loved me and whom I tried to love in return. I think I largely succeeded. I didn't get over being an occasional jerk and often a complete asshole, but I had come to know that no one else was to blame for that. The most important thing I did was to let go of any ill will towards the Vietnamese. No problem in my life was their fault.
Why do I bother with this story? I guess I just feel like it.
I came to have two children, a boy first then a girl. I honestly do not take credit for their many good qualities, their mother was the good influence, but I can proudly say that they are as unbiased and as color blind as anyone could hope to be and that is only one of the things I love about them and that makes me proud of them. I believe that if I had been a bigot that they would have got some of it. They didn't. My daughter's best friend in high school was a Hispanic boy from the Rio Grand Valley, her longest boyfriend was a big hulking American Indian, and her group included other minorities. My son was much the same. As an example, since he moved away we try to take a road trip each year by motorcycle. A couple years ago he found that a friend would be at Yellowstone at a time when we could meet him. I had heard enough about this guy that I felt I knew him a bit, though we had never met.When we got there they made contact by cell phone and we went to meet them at Old Faithful. I asked how we would spot him. No problem he said, there he is now. It was a black guy about six foot six and towered over most of the crowd. Easy to spot. In all I had heard about him, being black had never had a reason to come up. He is a good guy and that was enough. And remember what I said about once not even liking the looks of the most beautiful Vietnamese women? I am so glad I got over what I once felt and my kids got none of it. My daughter-in-law is a first generation Vietnamese, a fine woman, she is beautiful and so are my two grandchildren.
Odds are my children know some Jews but I honestly don't know because that would probably never be a part of the description of those friends that would mean anything to my kids. They would be unlikely to think it indicated any characteristic.
Now back to our little pissing match.
You are still so damned angry about that article by Raimondo and maybe you have some reason by your own lights but to me it was fair speculation in an atmosphere full of speculation and questioning that would not have raised a single eyebrow had it been speculation about any group composed largely of people with any specific denominator other than "Jew". Tough shit. That aint my fault and it aint my problem and despite what you think, I don't put the explanation of what I see as problems with Israel as being because it is a country of Jews. I know it is a country of humans and that means a number of them suck at being humane.
Before that whole blowup was over I posted two more essays, one that came out that day and one from two years before, which did the very same thing as Raimondo by linking individuals with groups which had an established history. To be fair, next time you call Raimondo the worst things you can conceive you should include Bacevich and Blumenthal, but, I suppose, since their essays were better documented and they are more widely respected you chose to stick with the easier target and not mention their speculation one single time.
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175597/tomgram%3A_andrew_bacevich%2C_eve...
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175334/tomgram:_max_blumenthal,_the_grea...
"Why do you deserve understanding or the benefit of the doubt, particularly when you also think it's OK to explore when it's OK to compare Jews to Nazis. Do you have any idea how perverse that is?"
You have mentioned that Nazi crap several times. What are you referring to? Did Raimondo do that and so I am guilty or do you think I did it somewhere? If you are accusing me of comparing Jews to Nazis get specific and identify exactly what I said. If it is something Raimondo did in his piece then go play with yourself and get over it, I don't have to agree with every part or even any part of what someone writes before I can offer it for others to consider.
You spread the most vile speculation without any consideration of the historical significance of what you spread about Zionists being responsible for dead Americans in Libya.
You imply that I may be okay with individual Jews but that I definitely have problem with the Jewish people. That is exactly backasswards. It is some few individual Jews which I have a problem with and that is based on their actions, not their race or ethnicity or religion or where they are from or what they look like. It is based on what they do.
You once went ape-shit crazy when you thought I insinuated you had a dual loyalty and went on to declare your deep abiding love for, and patriotism to, America, and that I was all kinds of bad for suggesting different. Which I didn't do. Today you remind us again of your deep unapologetic love of Israel and of "your people". I don't question any of that but I have noticed an inconsistency in your reactions. Every single criticism I have made of the actions of the Israeli government I have made loudly and often about the U.S government. You have never gone ape-shit crazy because you thought criticizing America meant I had some "perverse, warped, dangerous" view of Americans that caused me to spread "poison" about the very nature of Americans. You just will not allow yourself to see that it is the actions I am protesting, not all the people of any group or any nation.
You can hold your grudge against me as long as you want but you would be more credible next time you go off on me if you did it based on something current. The story and videos and pictures I linked to today are not speculation. Israel did execute that man today on a city street and did it with the certain knowledge that it would likely kill other innocents. It did. Some of them children whose parents and friends and countrymen will become even more completely hardened in their feelings of hate and their intent to retaliate. The situation there has become full of evil intent on both sides. If you think Israel is above criticism you are a fucking moron. If you just can't stand to hear it from me, well, again, tough shit.
by A Guy Called LULU on Fri, 11/16/2012 - 3:40pm
Impressive rant, I made it all the way through. Kudos.
by PeraclesPlease on Fri, 11/16/2012 - 5:08pm
PP is a better man than I. I perused this and may or may not read the whole thing. Two comments. First, the first time we corresponded was at TPM Cafe, in a thread written by a guy who thought it was productive to address when and when not to compare Jews to Nazis. You thought it was a great post. I've not forgotten that and I won't. Call me a liar. I couldn't care less.
Second, on the name thing. I won't lie. I do find that a fundamental flaw in blogging is that people write in anonymity. That's me. I also am a labor lawyer on the union side, I've given lectures on social media and I understand in real terms better than anyone on here about the dangers of posting under one's real name. But when someone accuses me, as you did, of trying to stifle debate, and does so anonymously, it pisses me off. And that's what happened here. You pissed me off with your stifling trope bullshit, and so I thought it appropriate to show you that in real life I don't stifle. I hate that fucking allegation because of its historical predicate. Maybe out by you they've never accused the Jews of controlling discourse, but I doubt it.
I really have nothing more to say to you lulu.
by Bruce Levine on Fri, 11/16/2012 - 5:55pm
All effective lobbying groups stifle discourse - Cubans on Castro, seniors on Medicare, Republicans on tough on security / support the troops /gotta cut the deficit, Jews on policy towards Israel, gays on DADT / gay marriage. ..
If you're not shutting people up, you're not a power to be reckoned with.
by PeraclesPlease on Fri, 11/16/2012 - 6:16pm
Peruse away. When you finish perusing you might have something coherent to say. Peruse a dictionary and you might even learn to use the word "trope" correctly.
pe·ruse
[puh-rooz] Show IPA
verb (used with object), pe·rused, pe·rus·ing.
1.
to read through with thoroughness or care: to peruse a report.
2.
to read.
3.
to survey or examine in detail.
by A Guy Called LULU on Fri, 11/16/2012 - 6:56pm
I appreciate the time you put in to try to keep reasonable dialog going. Sorry it didn't seem to help, but the stories were nice - maybe more in the future for the Creative Corner?
by PeraclesPlease on Sat, 11/17/2012 - 2:16am
"Oh come on lulu, you can do a little bit better than the standard, "you're just trying to stifle." I thought you had the riff down better. That's an old and tired trope. You need to be a little more creative than that."
Maybe old , but not tired. Some think it has an ongoing affect that is felt today by many who might speak out publicly.
Maybe you actually believe "stifling" never happens, maybe you think it never happened, or that, to any extent that it ever has, it is irrelevant. I think you are mistaken if not deliberately attempting to do that very thing by ridiculing the very idea as only a slur being troped up by haters. So do many others. Here are a few names you may recognize which you can add to your list of completely unconscionable people who think that what you assert in denial is, in fact, actually the tired old trope in play.
David Atkins, co-writer with Digby at Hullaballoo has an opinion.
http://digbysblog.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/gaza-by-davidoatkins.html
So does Robert Fisk.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/as-israel-and-hamas-open-the...
Chris Floyd argues as to why we should speak out regardless and it is in response to Atkins post at Hullaballo..
http://www.chris-floyd.com/
by A Guy Called LULU on Tue, 11/20/2012 - 12:38pm
I am a die-hard and proud Zionist living and work in a milieu where it's often no longer acceptable to acknowledge that. But I love the State of Israel and am proud to support her. Here's my tortured position. Anyone who believes that Israel, like no other nation, is required to tolerate an endless stream of missiles being lobbed into its populated areas has to explain that to me. Israelis like every other people, including Palestinians, have the right to live above ground and not in bomb shelters on a daily basis and they have the right to send their kids to school. Now comes the harder part, I think. Anyone who believes that Israel is being well-served by its current government in terms of reaching a long-term solution with the Palestinians is going to have to explain that to me as well. How do we ever have peace without two states, Israeli and Palestinian, existing side by side? Circle back--that doesn't mean that you don't kill the person who is lobbing missiles into your neighborhood.
by Bruce Levine on Thu, 11/15/2012 - 2:32pm
Could someone tell me if they are able to get to these folks pages like I can. I'll remove this if that's the case because I don't want to violate anyone's privacy. Thanks.
by Bruce Levine on Thu, 11/15/2012 - 2:44pm
No, I can't see them, you're okay.
by artappraiser on Thu, 11/15/2012 - 2:46pm
BTW, looks to me like you could get the paste of their comments to fit better on this thread if you go back and edit that comment to insert a return after the image of the question.
by artappraiser on Thu, 11/15/2012 - 2:49pm
Thanks AA. Didn't want to get sued for making a stupid point.
by Bruce Levine on Thu, 11/15/2012 - 2:50pm
Looks like I can delete it but can't edit it. I'll leave it. The powers that be might want it out of there anyway, and I will respect them for it and won't accuse them of stifling me if that's their decision!!!
by Bruce Levine on Thu, 11/15/2012 - 2:56pm
You can't seem to edit a comment once it's been replied to.
by PeraclesPlease on Thu, 11/15/2012 - 4:38pm
As a nation formed out of refugees post-WWII atrocities dropped into someone else's land, Israel has a duty to try to figure out a humane and peaceful way out of the situation, just as Palestinians have a duty to suck it up and make some reasonable effective compromises tied in with restraint on terrorism because sometimes life just sucks and you have to work it out anyway.
(Greeks got tossed out of Turkey, Ukrainians were sent to die in Siberia en masse, the east Burmese never got their referendum on independence, South Vietnam got overrun, and the Congo has been a bloody playground for 5 states for the last 20 years, and then there's Chechnya - i.e. could be worse)
Expecting either side to solve this unilaterally is a joke.
Expecting either side can go breeding, settling, razing, rocketing or otherwise creating their fucking "facts on the ground" in defiance of reason and humanity deserves condemnation.
But we've got Hatfields vs. McCoys, and frankly I see it with as much contempt as the 2 villages in India who get together each year to throw stones at each other. Except we don't give those villages billions of dollars each year and ask their leaders to help us figure out Mideast policy or influence our elections.
BTW, Bruce's good buddy David Seaton suggests showering money on Hamas to turn them as fat and lazy as Fatah and arguably Hezbollah. But then again, Bibi thrives on yelling "the danger, the danger", so calming the situation seems to work against his re-election interests. Wonder what he'd do if the Palestinians had an actual army.
by PeraclesPlease on Thu, 11/15/2012 - 4:37pm
How is ole' Seaton? We had a very strange and complicated relationship, but I did and still do consider him a good buddy indeed, notwithstanding his Jew Fatigue!!! I mean I don't loathe everyone who says bad things about my peeps. And I'd love to get his take on what's going on in Spain.
By the way, I do agree with you that Bibi is definitely eyeing the election, but not so much as you might think because, tragically, he no longer has any serious opposition. Jewish Israelis have a certain kind of fatigue themselves--to their long-term detriment I fear.
by Bruce Levine on Thu, 11/15/2012 - 4:48pm
Yeah, wasn't sure if Livni had a path back to relevance, but I assume asking Peres to run is an indication of "no".
by PeraclesPlease on Thu, 11/15/2012 - 5:01pm
Yea, asking an 88 year-old to get on the campaign trail doesn't really bode well for a political coalition.
by Bruce Levine on Thu, 11/15/2012 - 5:24pm
David most recently is bragging over at FDL that he is a sage on IP, has always had it all figured out. In other news--you can see the evidence if you check his Diary archives there) he became the rare Obamabot over there as regards this recent election (party because he thought it was far better for the IP situation!), and had a hard time convincing those folks that he wasn't always one [insert irony smilie here] and received many tons of vitriol in response.
by artappraiser on Thu, 11/15/2012 - 5:08pm
Bless his heart, but I absolutely cannot imagine David saying anything positive about President Obama. I'll have to check it out!!! :)
by Bruce Levine on Thu, 11/15/2012 - 5:23pm
He says he would vote for Donald Duck-D before voting for a Republican. He didn't muster much positive for Obama, though did note that if Romney's comment was correct, Obama took 47% and turned it into 50.6%, but long term the Dems need 60%.
As for IP, he was just saying the corruption of money thing from 5 years ago was accurate - Fatah's gotten too lazy to hardly steal as much as they used to - might be a strategy for Hamas to throw money at them.
Going into the Grand Bargain, it's hard to say David's off (and Genghis seems none too optimistic either) - time to pressure, but I don't know if anyone's up for it.
by PeraclesPlease on Thu, 11/15/2012 - 6:25pm
by artappraiser on Thu, 11/15/2012 - 8:15pm
by artappraiser on Thu, 11/15/2012 - 8:36pm
by artappraiser on Thu, 11/15/2012 - 9:25pm
Useful links from Glenn Greenwald on Gaza conflict.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/11/15/assassinating-the-chanc...
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/11/15/bodies-for-ballots.html
http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/how-israel-shattered-ga...
It's rather absurd to carry out targeted attacks against Palestine and not expect a response. As the one article notes, Hamas is typically firing rockets into empty space just to show the people they're responding. And Greenwald notes, more Palestinians were killed yesterday than Israelis in 3 years. That doesn't mean casualties should always be equal to be acceptable, but we've seen this movie with overwhelming IDF superiority from air, mortars, tanks, for how many decades now? The Turkish flotilla brought this out into the public, but the west seems still pretty unconcerned - or as Greenwald notes, we've now accepted targeted assassinations from the White House so can't complain, and our internal policy with tasers and other over-the-top police brutality is always "the suspect should have cooperated, so we had to respond with overwhelming force". So it's not just an Israeli problem - we've all lost our humanity.
Note: I'm still pissed that we made a big deal about Palestinian elections, and then when they chose the government they wanted, we said, "no dice, unacceptable to choose Hamas". So what we wanted was a show election, one that put in our puppet like Karzai, so we could check the "free elections" box without affecting the corrupt status quo. Truly disturbing. If the Republicans arranged elections like this, we'd be horrified. And this last time, Hamas even boycotted the elections and Fatah did poorly. Our puppets apparently need another shine of paint and strings tightened.
by PeraclesPlease on Fri, 11/16/2012 - 3:09am
I don't have much to disagree with you, except the premise, and I read the link--which is just an assertion without citation--that Gazan rockets have generally been aimed at non-populated areas in Israel. That is just absolutely absurd. Wherever they've been aimed PP, they've caused civilians in Sderot and Ashkelon to spend hours and hours and now days in bomb shelters, with a complete cessation of school and normal life. Now I know you don't think that's OK, but some might think it doesn't warrant any response because I don't know. But this notion that the rockets from Islamic Jihad, and even Hamas have only been aimed at non-populated areas is simply something that is made up--as is this notion that rocket attacks are only responsive to Israeli strikes on cells.
Again, I understand and appreciate genuine criticism of Israel's and the United States' response to the election of Hamas, I understand genuine criticism of the manner in which Israel chooses to respond to missile attacks, and I ultimately understand the tragic and ongoing development of facts on the ground, but I don't accept this notion that: (1) rocket attacks are prompted by Israeli attacks on terrorist cells--that just completely ignores how different factions compete with Hamas for popular support and; (2) respectfully, because you are the most balanced real critic of Israel on this site (except for maybe my buddy Ack), this notion that rockets are being lobbed at unpopulated areas is just absolutely absurd.
by Bruce Levine on Fri, 11/16/2012 - 8:14am
Thanks for your calm continued discussion. But no Bruce, it doesn't looke to be simply "made up" or "absurd" - look at the list of rocket attacks through 2012 and how many have "no injuries or damage" next to them, how many are listed as landing in a field - do you think these people are that stupid or inaccurate?
Yes, these dummy rocket attacks do inconvenience people, and even a dummy attack can accidentally hurt someone, but consider the everyday inconvenience Palestinians deal with, with no end in sight, as well as the much greater death when an invasion like yesterday's into Gaza took place....
by PeraclesPlease on Fri, 11/16/2012 - 9:21am
I hate like hell that we're in this situation. But I don't believe that the one million Israeli civilians within range of these "dummy" rockets (whatever that means) are whistling Dixie for the heck of it when they're imploring the government to do something. If you have kids, or you have loved ones who have kids, it's not a far stretch to understand what's going on. You might call it inconvenience, but I just don't think that's fair. And, of course, thank heavens that the folks firing these rockets generally can't seem to be able to hit a bull in the ass with a bass fiddle. But the notion that they ain't trying to is something I just don't accept--and I believe it's overly gratuitous.
by Bruce Levine on Fri, 11/16/2012 - 9:27am
Look, these guys know damn well if a rocket hits something, IDF will respond 10 fold, so it's better to shoot and miss and tell the folks at home "we tried". The stats make this pretty obvious for most, but not all, rocket firings.
I said some of these rockets do hit, so they do terrorize the civilian population whether they're 1 in a 1000 chance - you don't send your kid out to play with incoming fire however unlikely. Of course the IDF is terrorizing the civilian population when it hits its targets and 2/3 dead are women and children, or clamps down in other ways. It's a vicious cycle, and I wish someone would take responsibility to push the situation forward an iota.
by PeraclesPlease on Fri, 11/16/2012 - 10:17am
U.S. State Dept. daily press briefing transcript, Nov. 16, 2012, subtopic: Middle East Peace Process,
Sample excerpt:
by artappraiser on Sat, 11/17/2012 - 12:33am
by artappraiser on Sat, 11/17/2012 - 1:14am
by artappraiser on Sun, 11/18/2012 - 5:45pm
And I left Elder of Ziyon because I thought they were more civil here. I'm with Bruce; taking military action after a gazillion rockets have rained down on you is self-defense. But I regret that noncombatants are going to die.
by Aaron Carine on Sat, 11/17/2012 - 6:50am
Shooting rockets after a targeted assassination is self-defense.
But I regret that Israelis civilians are inconvenced and have to sit inside a day when rockets are fired into empty fields. <snark/>
Netanyahu has been fucking around with the Palestinian situation forever. Imagine the outrage if there were a targeted assassination of him? Doesn't he have some responsibility to move the situation forward, or it's all upon the guys wedged into the West Bank and Gaza with little economic or political power?
What do you say to the charge that Bibi timed this to disrupt another peace / ceasefire agreement arranged by Gershon Baskin?
So Mitt Romney can come kiss Bibi's ass and ask his support in running the US, while rich fuckers come and parade around this Pope to get his blessing, but Bibi can't do something to promote peace in his own backyard. Pathetic and disgusting. Sadly it doesn't look like the coming elections will help the situation. Peace just doesn't seem to have a strong following.
by PeraclesPlease on Sat, 11/17/2012 - 7:23am
Peracles, if you think the rockets have only landed in empty fields, you need to do more research.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_Israel
The targeted assassinations came after the massacres and continual rocket attacks, so they can't claim they are defending themselves against them. The targeted killings may be within the laws of war, since they're going after enemy commanders.
by Aaron Carine on Sat, 11/17/2012 - 7:53am
Also, Netanyahu can't move things forward while Palestinians are demanding Israel's destruction. I can't say whether Bibi killed the guy to prevent a ceasefire.
by Aaron Carine on Sat, 11/17/2012 - 7:55am
Note the detailed listing of rocket attacks per year in the links within your Wiki link- most but certainly not all are into empty fields, no injury or damage.
As for this proclamation above, things can't move forward while Israel expands settlements and does targeted attacks into Palestine, periodically destroying them. I.e. 2 can play that game, everyone can put their showstoppers to negotiations in place. What does it really matter whether some Palestinians demand Israel's destruction? They're powerless to actually do it - it's just more Arabic hyperbole - which I think is an actual fixture of the language - Jussive mood.
But look, Israel receives billions a year, has a real economy, has by far the most control. The Palestinians are a ragtag bereaved lot, a bunch of permanent refugees under permanent observation & manipulation. Who do you really expect to lead the dance?
And is Israel officially at war with Palestine to justify the targeted attacks? I thought there was some kind of peace, with a recognized Palestinian government. Or like the US with its drones, Israel reserves the right to targeted violations of peace to enable its vision of a more perfect peace? (but don't let the other side try it, or there will be targeted reprisals to targeted outbursts of non-pacific/subordinate behavior)
by PeraclesPlease on Sat, 11/17/2012 - 9:04am
And at FiredogLake today:
by PeraclesPlease on Sat, 11/17/2012 - 10:33am
And at The Daily Beast
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/11/16/another-ceasefire-anoth...
by A Guy Called LULU on Sat, 11/17/2012 - 11:30am
And at The New York Times
A somewhat similar story of a different execution.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/17/opinion/israels-shortsighted-assassina...
by A Guy Called LULU on Sat, 11/17/2012 - 1:13pm
Peracles, they aren't powerless to kill and harass Israelis, are they? They will keep doing it until they abandon the goal of destroying Israel. The wiki article said that over forty have been killed and many more wounded by rocket attacks. There have also been several lethal attacks on the ground in the past five years. If this is "some kind of peace", who needs a war?
I can't condone Cast Lead, which killed six hundred noncombatants, but it is important to remember who provoked it.
Netanyahu and most Knesset members favor a Palestinian state. Bibi's desire to keep the settlements and part of the Jordan valley(not a large part of the West Bank) is a problem, but not as big a problem as the pledges to destroy Israel.
by Aaron Carine on Sat, 11/17/2012 - 3:52pm
but it is important to remember who provoked it.
How can anyone remember who provoked it? Each side holds grievances decades old and blames the other for starting it. As we wander though the depths of time the first strike is surely lost.
Each side has to answer a basic question. What am I willing to give up for peace? I haven't heard a good answer to that question from either side.
by ocean-kat on Sat, 11/17/2012 - 5:00pm
This is exactly correct.
by tmccarthy0 on Sat, 11/17/2012 - 6:14pm
Arabs have been massacring Jews throughout history. Jews went from defense to offense only in the late 1930s. What pisses the Arabs off most is the fact that the Jews can now defend themselves. Note that their "anti-Zionist" massacres in 1929 were of indigennous religious Jewish families in Tzfat and Hebron. Cowards then, too.
by Callen (not verified) on Tue, 11/20/2012 - 9:11am
They are relatively powerless to kill and harass Israelis, as shown by their pathetic efforts of late. They will not drive Israel into the ocean - they'll barely disturb traffic in Jerusalem. Several lethal attacks is not a war, as the full-scale attack on Gaza showed 3 years ago.
Enough hyperbole - yes, the Palestinians are assholes, and so are the Israelis, but the Israelis have the upper hand in terms of weapons, money, and control of air/land/sea, plus the support of the US that won't even talk to elected Hamas.
Not fixing the situation also "provokes it". Bibi's keeping settlements is every bit as big a problem as pledges to destroy Israel, as his are actively pledges to destroy Palestine, through long-term attrition and "facts on the ground", while the other are mostly overexcited words by powerless people. They're not stupid - they know another 50 years of occupation means a completely subjected or dispersed Palestinian people, and there's no sign Israelis have anything else on the mind. (officially; the guy who tried to do the cease-fire for one deserves a lot of credit)
So tell Bibi to get off his keister, stop mocking up a war with Iran, and solve the real problem. He can do it if he wants, but his power base is in keeping everyone worried about their safety, and the permanent threat of midgets on the periphery. A fine play, worthy of Shakespeare.
by PeraclesPlease on Sat, 11/17/2012 - 5:06pm
Peracles,
It is simply setting up an unfair and untrue benchmark when you say that all that Gaza rockets can do is mess up traffic in Jerusalem. First, have you ever driven in Jerusalem? I have and it's already messed up; it makes Manhattan look like Route 66. Second, the rockets are making it absolutely impossible for the Israelis in the south to live their lives. No country, not one, can be expected to tolerate that.
As to who started it, it gets ridiculous, but the notion that Israel provoked rockets from intensifying in October is even more ridiculous. It's just too friggin' simple to say it's tit for tat. I loathe Bibi and what he is doing in the West Bank more than anyone, or as much as anyone, because he is creating those facts on the ground--and it is destroying the dream. But Bibi didn't start this particular escalation--Hamas and its more radical rivals in Gaza did this. And so again, no nation, not even Israel, can be expected to tolerate the lobbing of rockets on its territory. The notion that it must be tolerated because Bibi is a prick is simply absurd.
Ocean-kat asks the right question. Which side is proposing a long-term real solution and right now the answer is neither. But when it comes to Israel and Palestine, I hope it's more than the money that we send over there that keeps us from caring nary a lick about the thousands killed in Syria, the looming crisis for the Palestinians in Jordan who live as second class citizens in their own country, the ongoing crisis for everyone in Lebanon, particularly the Palestinians, and everywhere else--not to mention the number of civilians killed directly in our name (which I know you more than anyone here reminds us of).
by Bruce Levine on Sat, 11/17/2012 - 5:59pm
If we're going to make the claim "impossible to live their lives", let's discuss how Palestinians are living their lives. I think you'll agree (?) there's little comparison in standard of living and daily inconvenience. But no, I don't think that's an acceptable final lifestyle for southern Israelis, nor for Palestinians.
I didn't say rockets should be tolerated - I said many of these rocket "attacks" are to save face, intending no damage, while some are malicious and do kill and destroy. This has been said over and over, and it's supported by the record of rocket attacks like the Wikipedia link I sent, and even there, I agree that no population can live under the terror of "fake" rocket attacks knowing that some of them will hit something, God knows when. I also don't think Hamas is particularly "escalating". The altercation in the 80's and 90's was much worse, there are no longer so many bombs on buses and markets, etc. that made daily existence a crap-shoot.
What I did note was the Israeli guy who proposed a de-escalation and a way to eliminate the rocket attacks, even allowing an agreed way that IDF could take out rocket sites without provoking a Hamas response. Unfortunately, the Israeli government just assassinated the Palestinian who would oversee this effort. Back to square 1. Okay, they're relying on the Egyptian president to pull together a truce, but who's the Palestinian who will implement and maintain this truce long-term?
And can we agree that Israel is much more in control of the situation than Hamas, so that maybe it's Israel's responsibility to lead the way, whatever the state of Hamas, Fatah, and smaller renegade cells? This isn't India vs. Pakistan - it's Russia vs. Chechnya.
by PeraclesPlease on Sun, 11/18/2012 - 3:36am
Look I am not comparing the living conditions of Palestinians in Gaza to Israelis. I am saying one thing and that is that the notion that Israel should tolerate rocket attacks on its soil is absurd and to me it is compelling that anyone would think otherwise (not you) in and of itself. That one Israeli opines that the one person--the head of Hamas' military wing--who could broker a ceasefire was killed by Israel deliberately makes for great parlour talk. Folks love to quote those types of course; we've seen this movie before. But of course will anyone recant that assertion if G-d willing a ceasefire is negotiated in the next couple of days? I won't hold my breath.
by Bruce Levine on Sun, 11/18/2012 - 8:06am
well, targeted assassinations whether by US, Israel or Palestine seems a pretty unlikely to peace, just as raining down rockets or helicopter fire. Not all ceasefires are equal, and the interesting thing about this one was a mechanism to cooperate on strikes and avoiding escalation per each incident. Certainly there's more than 1 leader in Palestine, but the guy killed was say rather well-placed.
Anyway, I think we've beaten this one to death as one thread. Live to debate another day.
by PeraclesPlease on Sun, 11/18/2012 - 11:20am
It is just not true that the rockets are a product of Israeli targeted killings. It is accurate to assert that one effect of Israel's targeted killing--at least in the short-term--is that the number of rockets coming from Gaza have increased and intensified. But the rockets, principally due (I surmise) to intra-Gazan disputes, have been fired consistently for weeks and months.
There are two issues, one long-term and the other short-term. The short-term issue is getting the rocket fire from Gaza to cease. I think most Israelis and, yes most Americans, understand that, no matter what, rockets cannot be fired into Israeli territory (even if they miss purposely or otherwise). That's a simple truth and I'll accept my lumps for pushing that one. The real question is whether it is necessary and/or prudent to escalate this by entering Gaza and rooting out the rockets one by one. Doesn't seem prudent to me, but my kids aren't in bomb shelters.
The long-term issue is how do you get back to the negotiating table and reach an agreement that is fair, or as fair as possible, to both Israelis and Palestinians. I have no faith in what is in Bibi's heart, and I don't believe that Abbas has the ability to do anything if he wants to. And that is exacerbated by an intransigent Israeli government, a resigned and detached Israeli population, and by a great swath of the Palestinian leadership and the entire Islamic world that will never accept a Jewish State in Israel.
My only concern around here, as a committed person to certain ideals that guide my life outside of Judaism and in my more secular daily reality, is that my like-minded brothers and sisters on the left avoid falling into the same traps about Jews that their ancestors fell into. I don't stifle and the only reason I showed my FB thing was in response to that charge, and to show that in the real world, I oversee discussions with people from every facet of my life--a discussion thread consisting of Likudniks and one-staters, and all of whom are my brothers and sisters.
by Bruce Levine on Sat, 11/17/2012 - 8:26am
Shabbat Shalom Aaron. I told myself I was going to try to avoid blogging on the Sabbath but I tend to break rules. Aaron, this place is nothing like Elder, although there are some posters here who are the mirror-image of the muslim-haters over there. Keep posting, and don't mind PP--he's provocative but inside he's a good egg even if he'll never admit it.
by Bruce Levine on Sat, 11/17/2012 - 7:58am
In real life my name is Veruca Salt - a truly bad egg.
by PeraclesPlease on Sat, 11/17/2012 - 8:47am
The Israeli intel narrative, as transcribed by Ethan Bronner at the New York Times:
by artappraiser on Sun, 11/18/2012 - 8:33pm
A few notes before heading out for the day. NPR just gave a figure of sixty thousand dollars per Iron Dome intercept. Of course each miss costs the same and google says the successful intercept rate is up to ninety percent. The estimated cost of the rockets they are intercepting is eight hundred dollars each.
The reporting of Hamas drones seems to be simply passing on by the NYT of scare hype. Scare hype is used by every government to reinforce their public’s support of its own actions. Does anyone read this sort of story about the diabolically smart enemy and try to imagine the implied abilities involved. A hobbyist’s radio controlled model airplane could technically be considered a drone but hardly a threat as part of a weapon system.
A little thought about the technology required to build and operate a drone system which had any military value makes it impossible for me to believe that it is happening in the West Bank. Drones carrying surveillance equipment or weapons are still large. They are easily spotted and destroyed by militaries with Israel’s capability. Their operation identifies the place they are launched from. The location of their operators which must have two way contact with the drone using radio signals which makes place of origin easily pinpointed. The drone must either use GPS or multiple radio transmission and receiving stations for triangulating location. Runways are easily spotted. Can anyone imagine Hamas’ version of a Reaper not being followed home. Who would venture out to retrieve it and prep it for its next mission. How could any system like this survive a single mission over Israel if it was ever somehow developed and put in place?
The hype of fear intended by the drone story but which sounds completely unreasonable should cause skepticism of the rest of the story about the Fajr-5 rockets. They are no doubt a powerful weapon but very innacurate even if operated with their full compliment of high tech launch equipment . Google. They are twenty feet long, weigh a ton, would need be manhandled rather then moved and aimed by the designed equipment, and would be very crudely aimed when used as Hamas 'terrorists’ would be forced to do and would destroy any small building they were launched from. Open air set up of a hundred of them would be a risky operation for sure.
I don’t deny that Hamas has obtained some number of Fajr-5‘s but I would bet in an instant that the number was exaggerated greatly and that the threat, beyond escalation of exaggerated fear that they generate, exaggerated as well.
This comment was quickly and poorly constructed but I wish that major news sources at least would do some analysis of claims like the one here by the IDF, or any official source anywhere rather than simply pass them on.
by LULU (not verified) on Mon, 11/19/2012 - 8:31am
I simply think it's a good thing to know what they are thinking rather than not. And I don't blame a messenger for misleading when an article is scattered through with "Israeli officials said."
I'd rather read what actual parties involved think rather than multitudinous emotional op-eds of outsiders in support of one side or another. If it's fear mongering to have this information, then you are arguing for keeping things secret. Conflict Resolution experts work this way: first listening carefully to what the parties involved are actually thinking. Not starting out arguing with preference for or against one side or another.
by artappraiser on Mon, 11/19/2012 - 2:41pm
BTW, if you listen, what Hamas' chief just basically said in a press conference is that they want this to continue, to "bring it on":
"The weapons of the resistance have caught the enemy off guard," he said. "Netanyahu asked for calm and not us."
More links downthread.
by artappraiser on Mon, 11/19/2012 - 3:17pm
Re: some analysis of claims like the one here by the IDF, or any official source anywhere rather than simply pass them on.
I just added some analysis from Al Jazeera downthread, that what you are arguing about them not really having significantly increased military strength is not what Hamas wants people to think. So turns out both sides disagree with you; Hamas and the IDF agree that Hamas has increased its military strength.
by artappraiser on Mon, 11/19/2012 - 3:59pm
I think you misunderstand what I was saying. I'll take the blame for that. I was in a hurry and like I said, I felt the comment was poorly constructed. I'll try to do a bit better with an explanation.
I expect what the IDF puts out to be reported and so too with Hamas. I did not mean to suggest anything different.
"I'd rather read what actual parties involved think rather than multitudinous emotional op-eds of outsiders in support of one side or another".
My default position when any government starts explaining why they need to attack another country militarily is that a lot of what they say is B.S. meant to stoke emotions and they hope that their B.S. gets passed on uncritically as the NYT, in this case, did.
"I simply think it's a good thing to know what they are thinking rather than not. And I don't blame a messenger for misleading when an article is scattered through with "Israeli officials said."
I would like to know what they are thinking too but I f we accept what they are saying uncritically we only know what they are saying, not necessarily what they are really thinking. If we see that they are saying crap that is obviously not true, and their talk about Hamas' drones seems to me to fit that description, then we can add that bit of understanding to the information we gather in attempting to understand more of the total picture.
"If it's fear mongering to have this information, then you are arguing for keeping things secret."
I did not suggest that the messenger was doing the fear mongering, I said the the IDF was hyping the threat of Hamas' drones and so the IDF was the one, in this case, hyping to raise the fear level to justify their actions. I also said that every government does this so I was not singling out the Israeli government or its sub department, the IDF as being some kind of unique bad.
To quote myself, "The reporting of Hamas' drones seems to be simply passing on by the NYT of scare hype. Scare hype is used by every government to reinforce their public’s support of its own actions". So once again, the NYT was passing on the IDF announcement as they should and must, but the hype in this case, if it is such, is produced by the IDF. What I said I wished for was some analysis by the NYT that lets the evidence that it is hype be seen by those who read the IDF statement and might think that Hamas actually is approaching "Reaper" capability.
"...that what you are arguing about them not really having significantly increased military strength is not what Hamas wants people to think. So turns out both sides disagree with you; Hamas and the IDF agree that Hamas has increased its military strength."
What both sides say is not automatically the way things are. Both sides have their reasons to say that Hamas is stronger. Both sides cannot be said to disagree with me because I did not say that Hamas had not increased its military strength. I said that I thought that they had not developed any drone capability that could be any kind of effective military tool but that the IDF was saying they had done so as an attempt to hype the fear level. I went on to say that they were probably also exaggerating other claims of increased missile capability by Hamas even if Hamas has some bigger missiles that can go further before they [usually] miss their target. That is different than saying that there has been no increase in their power.
by A Guy Called LULU on Mon, 11/19/2012 - 9:13pm
by artappraiser on Mon, 11/19/2012 - 2:51pm
by artappraiser on Mon, 11/19/2012 - 2:57pm
More on what he said, including that Netanyahu asked for a truce:
Al-Manar English
Al Bawaba News
CBS News
(that Netanyahu did so is denied by the Israeli government, see Reuters)
Also @ The Guardian, see
Israel-Gaza: truce talks ongoing in Cairo – live updates
Live coverage as Egypt peace talks continue amid fears of ground invasion
by artappraiser on Mon, 11/19/2012 - 3:19pm
by artappraiser on Mon, 11/19/2012 - 3:49pm
What Uri said: http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/avnery/1353080494
Talking about this solely as a security issue is an effective political tactic for those whose strategy is to kick the broader, deeper conflict down the road forever. I'm not playing.
by acanuck on Mon, 11/19/2012 - 4:35pm
Talking about this solely as a security issue is an effective political tactic for those whose strategy is to kick the broader, deeper conflict down the road forever.
A very accurate and succinct description of what has been going on, for decades.
by NCD on Mon, 11/19/2012 - 8:30pm
Bronner noted in a Nov 16 article that the metaphor of maintaining a grass lawn is known to be used:
Gideon Levy borders on sarcastic in a rant about basically the same thing:
And Jeff Goldberg, believe it or not, is becoming brutally blunt:
The Iron Dome, Press Bias, and Israel's Lack of Strategic Thinking, Nov. 16
Against a Ground Invasion of Gaza, Nov. 17
While Marc Lynch on Friday waxed skeptical for various reasons that the Arab Spring's Arab street would jump to the barricades over this, despite all the Arab media attention to it, and he hasn't updated his blog since.
by artappraiser on Mon, 11/19/2012 - 10:01pm