The Times of London is reporting that the west and Israel are moving toward a deal in which Israel makes concessions on the alleged peace process and is given the green light to attack Iran within a year.
"Urgent!!!" writes Mohammad of Vancouver. "When are you going to address this. It is getting louder and louder. What deal?" Then this prescient awful thought: "This is the rerun of the Roadmap and the Iraq War."
-
-
- Informant’s text messages shed new light on NYPD spy program … 0
- Why did ‘NYT’ serve as platform for ‘military propaganda’? 1
- Reluctantly taking down monstrous orientalist video, college union in Israel … 7
- George Orwell would hate Israel 29
- First photographs of ‘Arabs with Altitude’ and Palestinian flag … 0
- Exile and the Prophetic: Freeing the president 0
- Why Palestine is different 7
- PLO: Israel has built 16,000 settlement units over the past … 1
-
- Two friends meet for 5 minutes in Jerusalem 1712
- Palestinian-American Raed Zidan plants flag on top of Everest, dedicates … 1368
- Christians denounce Israel’s manhandling of worshipers at Holy Sepulcher on … 954
- Barbara Boxer’s visa bill for Israel comes under concerted attack 810
- Washington Post’s racism map omits Israel 438
- Israeli report on al-Dura case is vengeful and ‘surreal,’ says … 401
- There’s been a sea change in US opinion on the … 314
- Video: Soldiers aim guns at fallen boy’s head outside West … 302
-
- Kennedy’s insistence on right of return prompted Ben-Gurion to rewrite … 107
- Abulhawa declines to ‘balance out’ several Israelis in ‘Al Jazeera’ … 94
- Barbara Boxer’s visa bill for Israel comes under concerted attack 93
- Washington Post’s racism map omits Israel 73
- Biden says Jewish ‘influence’ behind American cultural politics is ‘immense… … 57
- Two friends meet for 5 minutes in Jerusalem 54
- Both Massad, and ‘Open Zion’, ignore the experience of Middle … 50
- Israel cracks down on American travel to West Bank by … 50
-
- Informant’s text messages shed new light on NYPD spy program targeting Muslims http://t.co/J7dbBLZZXl, 13 hours ago
- Exile and the Prophetic: Freeing the president http://t.co/FXU8YRToQS, 13 hours ago
- First photographs of ‘Arabs with Altitude’ and Palestinian flag atop Everest http://t.co/jQQ6xcFAWw, 13 hours ago
- George Orwell would hate Israel http://t.co/pXjc9SBxNL, 13 hours ago
- Reluctantly taking down orientalist video, college union in Israel protests that it got '1000s of positive reactions' http://t.co/uCZ0r5CDey, 13 hours ago
-
Recent Comments
click link to see last 100 comments- Reluctantly taking down monstrous orientalist video, college union in Israel protests that it got ’1000s of positive reactions’ (7)
- Shmuel: Derfner writes: Israel is a breeding ground for boors, always has been … and boors just naturally...
- DICKERSON3870: RE: “They ["The Union" - J.L.D.] honestly don’t know what they did wrong. They’re genuinely...
- DICKERSON3870: RE: “The clip is meant for comedic purposes only . . . In less than one day, the video received...
- George Orwell would hate Israel (29)
- Hostage: I have to ask. Has any great man of the past 200 years not been accused of anti-Semitism? Come to think of...
- Hostage: Obsidian, Source for your comment that Orwell was “an admitted anti-Semite”? Obsidian was incorrect in...
- eljay: >> Every country has the right to control its borders. But no country has a right to be an oppressive,...
- Kerry faults Israelis for complacency — peace isn’t ‘on the tip of everybody’s tongue’ (25)
- Ramzi Jaber: Citizen, yet again, I’m afraid you’re right but I hope you’re wrong ;-)
- SF officials describe ‘apartheid’ label as ‘intolerance alienating the Jewish community’ (34)
- Ramzi Jaber: Yes bintbiba, that’s right… “darabni wa baka, saba’ni wa shtaka”. The rhyme is...
- Annie Robbins: I wonder if there will be an internal jewish coup in the US led by the younger generation or it will...
- Glenn Greenwald on the Woolwich attack and blowback from the ‘war on terror’ (49)
- Annie Robbins: ckg, that’s very interesting.
- Reluctantly taking down monstrous orientalist video, college union in Israel protests that it got ’1000s of positive reactions’ (7)
Our Writers
- Philip Weiss
- Today in Palestine
- Adam Horowitz
- Alex Kane
- Matthew Taylor
- Max Blumenthal
- David Samel
- James North
Blogroll
After a peace deal, attacking Iran will be unnecessary.
Richard, your choice of words implies that it is 'necessary' to start yet another war right now, one which would make the Iraq War look like a barroom brawl. Are you in favor of war against Iran? *** Note the providence of the article. It is from JP, which has long served as an Israeli establishment mouthpiece. Also note that there is on author attribution. People, this is propaganda pure and simple. Does anyone seriously think President Obama stupid enough to involve us in a war against Iran for some nebulous promises from proven liars to make 'concessions' to the Palestinians? Sure, we'll let the Palestinians keep 1% of their land, hehe, IF you wreck the world economy and kill tens of thousands of innocent people. Not going to happen…
So Barack Obama and the Dems are going to partner with the Israeli Jewish Zionists in a deal that lets them bomb Iran in exchange for temporarily suspending their West Bank expansionism. This is no surprise whatsoever given that 20% of the Democrats in the US Senate are Jewish Zionists. The Tribe always finds a way to use its insider status to arrange sweetheart deals for itself.
The fact that Obama gets double teamed by JZ's Axelrod and Emanuel every time Michelle goes out of town probably doesn't help matters much, either.
I'm not in favor of war, nor am in favor of Iran. If the left stopped pandering to Iran's aggression, then there might be some hope as they wouldn't have a great deal of enablers adopting the "enemy of my enemy is my friend" approach, as if Israel is an enemy anyway.
Right. I keep telling people these Times reports are nothing but planted propaganda.,,they have been doing this regularly. Just compare it with the talking points of the hasabara crowd….they are all over the net sites beating this drum…'the West is with us, the West wants us to attack Iran!".."Saudi is with us!. Saudi wants us to attack iran!" Last week they floated a story that Saudi had given them permission to fly over Saudi airspace to attack Iran. That produced a spat of press release from Saudi and other MEstates denying Israel had any premission and warning them not to try it. Then they put out the story that their subs going thru the Suez were an advance position to attack Iran. Monkies rattling cages,…..I don't know what they think this accomplishes..it's not diverting any attention from I-P.
The Ahmadinejad regime in Iran is the only recent Islamic movement to have seriously stood up to the Zionists on behalf of the Palestinians, and until the corrupt Arab oil sheiks and US aid junkies are ousted, is probably the only one that ever will. Little wonder the Zionists want him gone. Little wonder the corrupt Washington establishment which rolls over for the Zionists as often as the Arabs do want him gone as well. He's highlights their own cowardice and servility.
after Iran stops funding terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah an attack on Iran will also be unnecessary.
Which ones are you referring to?
i believe murdoch owns the times of london so this would make sense
Iran's aggression??!? What planet are you on? You sound more like a filthy Israeli every day, Witty. Is Iran murdering children in their beds with white phosphorus and hellfire missiles? Is Iran shooting at fisherman off its shores who are trying to feed themselves? DID IRAN OVERTHROW AMERICA'S FREELY ELECTED SECULAR GOVERNMENT? Is Iran equipped with HUNDREDS of nuclear missiles targeting the entire middle east as the ghastly disgrace to humankind called Israel is? Has Iran attacked every country in the region except cypress (as israel has)? Are they or are they NOT guaranteed the right to enrich uranium as signatories of the NPT–the same treaty the filth of Israel refused to sign? I'll answer it for you. Yes–they are entirely within their legal rights. Have the Iranians indicated a willingness to obtain all enriched uranium from an international body such as the IAEA if a nuclear free zone in the region is established? I'll answer it for you. Yes they have. The Iranians are plotting a second holocaust? Sure pal…that's why their country is home to a thriving Jewish population. Liar. Criminal.
Another part of this scenario is that the IDF includes young USA & Brit citizens fighting in the IDF to support Israel's continued oppression of the Palestinians. Imagine if young USA or Brit citizens enlisted in the Hamas or Hebzullah armed forces? They'd be treated as simple terrorists, not to mention traitors to their host citizen countries. http://www.palestinianmothers.com/profiles/blogs/...
Agreed.
Supply, training, encouragement, funding for Hamas aggressions, and Hezbollah's violation of UN resolutions. Iran is within their rights to enrich uranium as a complying (sometimes) member of the nuclear non-proliferation protocols. And, Israel would be violating international law to attack a sovereign state that is in legal compliance with international nuclear protocols, even if that state is in violation of international law in funding, supplying, training terror activities on another sovereign state. The issue of the settlements in Israel/Palestine indicate Israel's apparent intent, either to stop settlement construction and be satisfied with enough or to expand. Similarly, Iran's military support of Hamas and Hezbollah and other factions, is a tipping issue, indicating to the world whether Iran seeks to be a peaceful and prominent member of the international community, or an aggressive interloper in others' negotiations.
What in god's green earth are you talking about, you vile bum? Now it's a crime to support the democratically elected government of Gaza but not a crime to kidnap members of that government and torture them in Israeli dungeons while you starve and bomb the civilian population for the "crime" of voting their conscience? You should be thrown into a tank of acid.
lol politicalcrossfire new israeli moderator is making a name for himself http://www.politicalcrossfire.com/forum/viewtopic... I started a topic inlcuding the youtube of amy goodman where a former israeli government official tlaks about how jews use the tactic of calling israels critics anti semites. without my permission and for no reason he moved it to the ghetto like middle east politics forum, where about 3 or 4 different people have the asme conversation about israel/ palestine border minutia every day. even though it was about the US and has nothing to do with middle east politics which I know nothing about. calling his bluff, I erased the entire post and changed the topic, to which he responded by suspended me. He has been a moderator for like 2 days, I've been posting there for years and broke no rules. Did I mention he is an IDF soldier?
You have gaping double standards. What about the US' "supply, training, encouragement, funding for " ISRAELI "aggressions, and" ISRAEL's "violation of UN resolutions"? Why does similar action's on a much smaller scale by Iran justify an attack on that country? Is an attack on the US likewise justified, in your view, for its own aggressions? Similarly, the US' military support of Israel– is THAT a tipping issue, indicating to the world whether the US "seeks to be a peaceful and prominent member of the international community, or an aggressive interloper in others' negotiations"? If we attempt hold other countries to standards we don't apply to ourselves then we have undermined our own standing in the international community. To advocate war against another nation for "aggressive" actions similar to those we have taken over multiple decades, not only with respect to Israel, but also in regards to many other countries throughout the world, is to gut any pretense of moral standing to which we might cling.
Hi lester, and welcome! That forum you were on looks dumb anyway. Bid them good riddance. Mondo Weiss has put up with me for awhile now, and I've used pretty much every parasitic organism in the field guide to schistosomic taxa I could think of to describe the Israelis and their dreadful "society" ok..I did get banned a couple times but…
Right or wrong, deal or no deal Israel will go ahead with its plan to attack Iran in the next few months. The movement of Israel's ships is a start not a warning. Keeping these ships in the Gulf for months on end until a deal is reached is not exactly as simple as one might think and those who do are naiive to say the least. Also, judging from Israel's past behavior, I don't think they will wait for a deal but will take the talk of a deal as sufficient for a go ahead. If the strike succeeds, no deal will be needed as far as Israel is concerned, if it seemes to be failing and Israel needs help, then a deal wil be done quick to get the help they need. History is about to be made again, keep your recorders on. I wonder if the Iranian leadership know what they're in for. Also, expect a lot of attacks inside Iran by "unknown" terrorists, a favorite distraction tactics for the Mosad.
You asked do I favor war and I said no, then you proceed to respond to me as if I said yes? What is that? Iran and you think that its only Israel's or US's decision about what happens to Iran. Its Iran's in fact. They define themselves as extra-legal by arming, funding, training Hezbollah and Hamas that actively undertake terror on civilians (Hezbollah less so, except for periodic large operations). They can stop that if they want to be treated as a peer sovereign state.
If Israel puts any ships in the gulf (Persian that is) and attacks Iran those ships will be sunk. (google sunburn-22 and persian gulf if you are interested in how). If the IAF attacks it will have to fly over either Turkey, Iraq or SA and none of those three powers would permit this. Right now Israel can rattle the bars on her cage, but she is powerless to attack Iran (unless, of course, she simply decides on preemptive nuclear war). So stop worrying folks. Don't let Murdoch's rag get under your skin.
Is that now the "new rationale" for an attack on Iran? Gee, all along I thought it was the speculation that Iran was building nuclear weapons. Silly me. What you imply of course is that Iran will be attacked regardless.
And if Israel, with a US nod, chooses to overfly Iraq or even Turkey with high altitude US jets impervious to those country's meagre air defenses, then what? What is going to stop them? The only thing that can stop them is for Obama to make publicly clear that an Israeli attack on Iran will not be tolerated by the United States. Not simply that it will displease us or that we feel "it is not helpful to the peace process" but that we will not tolerate it and will respond to the eventuality with military force, directed against israeli aggression.
And you don't think that Israel and the US can equally be defined as "extra-legal by arming, funding, training" various terror groups presently operating inside Iran?? Hezbollah and Hamas are both part of a legitimately elected government. How does arming them differ from the US arming Israel? It doesn't. And btw–do you really think that Israel–if given the green light to attack Iran overtly–would live up to any part of its bargain vis a vis the settlements? I don't.
Do you think the status of forces agreement between the US and Iraq–which calls for the US to defend Iraqi airspace–would be interpreted to allow Israeli transit for an attack on Iran? One scenario I've read would permit it—the transit would not be viewed as triggering "defense of iraqi airspace" but, instead, viewed as "offense against iran". You know what though? I don't think the Israelis will do it. Period.
Israel is crazy for sure. But I question whether they are that crazy. I don't think an attack will happen. I hope I'm right.
Whatever the legalisms may be, if Israel goes through Iraqi airspace, the whole world will view the attack as a joint US/Israeli venture. Obama knows that and would never allow them to do so.
And Hamas and Hezbollah BOTH refused to submit to the governments' that they were a part of, instead retaining their militias as militias. When you want Hezbollah and Hamas to be treated as statesmen, you describe them as part of the government, but then when their militias attack Israel (even in "response") they are no longer then part of the government? Thats what is called enabling.
C'mon people, Israel has always acted with litle regard to what the world thinks and always banked that their success will be enough to change everyone's mind. Obama will voice dispaointment, the countries whose territorial sovereignty were violated will cry foul , yada yada yada. At the end, Western nations will repeat the tired old line, "Israel has the right to defend itself". Everyone will be watching to see how this can be pulled off with little regard to the consequences. It's a win win situation for the West. For Israel, also, there is nothing they will take for an exchange to the total destruction of Iran's Nuclear capability. So, don't be naiive, look for the signs and watch how history repeats itself, just like OP Opera in Iraq. The question is not if, but when, only in Israel is this question already answered.
That was another poster that asked you that question. I was responding solely to your double standards. The US has repeatedly, over decades, armed, funded, and trained organizations and states that actively undertake terror on civilians. You seem to think that the US does not need to stop any of that, nor does Israel need to stop its decades of state terrorism, in order to "be treated as a sovereign state" but yet you justify threats against Iran for doing considerable less along these lines than the US and Israel does. I repeat, you have a gaping double standard. It is not in any way an ethical stance to hold others to standards you don't apply to yourself.
What aggression by Iran, witty? can you quote a SINGLE instance of aggression by Iran against its neighbours? Support for hezbollah does not count as aggression except in the mind of paranoics. hezbollah is a genuine national movement representing a large segment of lebanon's population that has traditionally been short-changed politically. I support hezbollah too – as a political entity – and I am not even a shiite. So how does that make Iran aggressive? Oh yes, then there's hamas – a resitance movement that is Sunni based yet is supported by a shiite governement. so israel does not like hamas because they refuse to be docile. That's just par for the course for an occupation regime. As for Israel being the enemy of the US – it might just be. israelis care about America only as a conduit of money – going one way, of course. They got us into Iraq big time. Our values diverge more and more by the day – as Israel is veering closer to a fascist/militarist model and America is inching leftwards. Besides, I have no doubt that israel will sacrifice american interests in a heart-beat were they to think it serves their own interests. They spy on America every second they get – and their hysterical supporters in this country work in Israel's not America's employ (what dual loyalty?). Face it Witty – israel is one of the most selfish, self-centered entities in the world today – and I for one totally don't trust them with nuclear weapons, especially given what type of lousy humans they are electing to office. I am actually beginning to think that we are talking about sanctions against the wrong country. I am also thinking that I wouldn't trust any american secrets to the hands of people like you, Witty. Hopefully you never needed – or got even confidential clearance. I have no objection to your following your heart. Your pre-rogative. Just please stop pretending that you care a hoot about America, beyond your narrow parochial interests.
If Iran sunk an Israeli ship in international waters that would be the provocation that would likely compel a military response. Do you mean to bless that?
for Obama to make publicly clear that an Israeli attack on Iran will not be tolerated by the United States Yes, and I believe in the easter bunny too. wake up, all O will do is show frustration and go on wit his daily. Israel already has the "nod" all we need now is the perfect time, say …Ramadan…
Thanks. Shocking (though not surprising, i suppose).
You may very well be right brad. Or not. I took the word of trusted and generally informed folks like Sy Hersh that an Iran attack was definitely in the offing before Bush left office. Like the apocalypse, the exact month of the attack was bandied about. It was not pure speculation but based on a variety of very ominous signs, including 4 of our carriers menacing Iran in the Gulf and the dismissal of the navy general (Fallon?) who was determined to be hostile to a planned attack. But it did not come to pass. We simply don't know. Please resist the temptation to play Jean Dixon.
I wrote very clearly that if Israel attacks Iran any Israeli ships in the Persian Gulf would be sunk. That will happen with or without my blessing. It would not be considered a provocation under any interpretation of international rules of war, it would be a clear case of self defense. Can you understand written English? Do you have any common sense? Why do you continue displaying such blatant stupidity?__
Jean Dixon!!!… ok… but i am sure you know the difference. I'm sorry I don't mean to sound like a fatalist or some kind of , well, Jean. But when you study history and how decisions are made, well, this is the only conclusion i have been able to come up with. I am still working on the plans required to make this happen, I hope i'm wrong because I think they will miscalculate the response, but we'll see.
I'll add it here, I think. Can't decide. You forgot this. Iran is within their rights to enrich uranium as a complying (sometimes) member of the nuclear non-proliferation protocols. Some need to act "within their rights", must sign treaties, surrender to protocols, while others are completely free of all these imperatives, they are monads not bound by the laws for the gogs of magog.
Sorry, I missed the "attacked from those ships" part.
Right now, neither is compromising one iota.
Egad man, the story in the news is tha passage of Israeli missile ships through the Suez canal. These are warships, under Israeli flag. This story was publicized (by the Israelis) because that means they can move towards Iran and presumably exert military pressure on Iran. If Israel attacks Iran by what ever means, it means that those ships are part of the Israel attack. It is, as a practical matter, quite irrelevant if they ever launch a single missile, they will be legitimate targets by Iranian defences. Under the international rules of war Iran would be entirely within its rights to sink those ships. I am quite flabergasted to even have to explain such simple concepts. Are you really this stupid Witty?
All wars are promoted and instigated by Jews according to you people?
An attack on Iran will mean the immediate collapse of the US government with the obliteration of Israel to follow within days. An Arab-Russian-Chinese combine will indeed hurt you badly. Any of you who claim to support Israel should be opposed to this act of suicide. But of course those who claim to support Israel support the military not the people.
Why are you now concerned about international waters? The Spirit of Humanity was boarded, and its civilian crew abducted within INTERNATIONAL WATERS. A clear act of war against each nation represented among her crew. Bueller? Bueller?
"Supply, training, encouragement, funding for Hamas aggressions, and Hezbollah's violation of UN resolutions." Oh, so NOW you're concerned about UN resolutions, Dick?
"An attack on Iran will mean the immediate collapse of the US government with the obliteration of Israel to follow within days." By golly, that's damn near irresistible!
The problem being that the growing anti-occupation movement within Israel, as well as Israeli children, would almost certainly be killed.
Perhaps the US should stop funding terrorist organizations like the IDF, the MOSSD and the Shin Bet.
Unfortunately they might be able to stage the air assault from Tiblisi…
…and that would mean overflying only Armenia or Azerbaijan to get to the Caspian Sea and then Iran.
Bueller refers to what??
Not just that but overflying Turkish or Balkan air space to get there. No, Israel does not have permission to fly an armada of 90 warplanes over those air spaces. And if they did, the Russians would have a say in this operation. Would the US risk WWIII if the Russians reacted to such a provocation and destroyed the IAF in Georgia? Don't think so. Would Israel risk losing its airforce in such an indefensible position? Don't think so. This suggestion is pure nonsense.
The lack of an attack doesn't invalidate Mr. Hersh's narrative. Neocon traitors were trying very hard to start another war. Senior DoD and DoS people were entirely opposed, especially within the intelligence community. They won the struggle to derail an attack, that doesn't mean that one wasn't 'in the offing'. If they had sat on their asses it might very well have gone off.
Like you give a damn
Oh, that post was directed at Witty. Bueller references Ferris Bueller's Day Off
Whether or not I give a damn is irrelevant. Innocent people will suffer for Zionist intransigence.
Not Jews, Israel. Although you may think its one and the same, its not.
They are turning up the pressure certainly. And, with their internal and international credibility at a 20 year low, Israel reasons "now or never" as far as an attack. A failed attack would be the worst outcome. A successful attack would remove the Iranian nuclear capability but invite long-term conflict for Israel and US with unforeseeable web of consequences. Allowing Iran to develop nuclear weapons will empower Iran to harrass indefinitely. ALL are bads. There are no good choices in this. Accepting Iran as a nuclear power is possible, if they indicate confidently that they intend to use their capability for energy solely, rather than as ANY form of threat. Their arming, funding, and training of Hamas and Hezbollah are indicators that they intend to threaten, not to restrain from it.
"their credibility" was referring to Iran's.
Witty, we readers all notice how you have avoided lovelyisraelis's and tree's specific questions which gave us the larger context to what you said about Iran's activities, putting them in larger perspective. It's clear Iran is reacting to Israel's and the USA's aggression in the first place.
NO. Although the Zionist regime (and its echo chamber in the USA, AIPAC et al) has certainly promoted, and still does, ever more "preemptive" wars; although the state of Israel says it is acting in behalf of world jewry, no rational reader here holding the facts believes this, Gentile or Jew. We all know that proportionately more Jewish Americans were against the war with Iraq, and are against any war with Iran, than Gentile Americans. That's because as a whole they are more informed because they care about Israel more than anything else and so go to more extreme effort than Gentile Americans to look under the blanket of MSM Hasbara spiel passing for objective news about the Middle East. Try another leading question along the lines of "So how many times did you beat your wife?"
The gas lines in the USA will be much longer than in the early '70's after we jumped in to rescue the Israelis (and for which the USA came within a hair's breath of nuclear war with the USSR). And the price will be $10.00 per gallon. Now that should help the US economy by ripple effect, eh? Not to worry, an eventual Draft would be needed, and that would help as a federal jobs program, not to mention a ballooning of the military-industrial complex. Obama has studied FDR I imagine.
Again, since Israel consistently uses its nuclear power as a threat, why is Israel accepted as a nuclear power?And if Israel is accepted as a nuclear power, despite its constant threats, then what is wrong with accepting Iran's interest in nuclear energy?
It is the same
So you answer my question as to whether you believe all these wars are started by Jews, by stating that Jews run the media, the lobby rules America and Jews are tricking gentiles?
once again Witty: hezbollah IS NOT the US's enemy. It wouldn't be israel's either if israel stops attacking and having designs on Lebanon. In the last invasion and bombing attack on lebanon, most of us here cheered on HEZBOLLAH, NOT THE INVADERS. People are usually on the side of the defenders not the attackers. Hamas is also not the US's enemy. Not even israel's if the latter comes to its senses. There is therefore not only nothing wrong with Iran supporting these groups but in my opinion they should be supported by the US officially, just as the US supports other countries and groups in the ME. Just because Israeli zealots don't like it doesn't mean we should go along with zealotry. Time is not so far off that we, in the US, will come to see israel as definitely not our friend. As a potential threat to US's interests in the region, pressure should be brought on israel to dismantle its nuclear weapons rather than Iran which doesn't even have any. Unfortunately, Witty, I must ask you – which country's citizen are you? I have no problem if you say israel. Just stop pretending that you give a hoot about the US or understand its interests.
What question? About double standards? You pick odd speculations to make such insulting ignorant judgements. I've been an anti-militarism activist relative to the US, as long as I've known Phil. (over 40 years in time). And, I've consistently opposed the practice of state terrorism when applied by Israel. "Terrorism" defined as targeting civilians. I don't conclude that the norm of Israeli IDF behavior is to do that, but the exception. Even the operations in Lebanon and Gaza, I conclude were intended for valid military purposes, but conducted in a negligent and excessive manner, to say the least. In contrast, I conclude that Hamas and other factions, in conducting terror campaigns ONLY directed at civilians in Israel, is of a different nature. When Iran funds, trains, supplies, and encourages terror on civilians, it also is of a different nature. The questions of how to deal with them is an important and valid question, but implying in any way that Iran's version of state terror is excusable is inhumane.
Israel doesn't have designs on Lebanon. Where did you make that up from? Of course, Iran supporting terror on civilians is atrocious. That you would apologize for it in any way, is sickening to me. It will be a LONG TIME before the US severs its close relationship and nearly certainly never (at least not within my great-grandchildren's lifetimes, should that happen). I'm an American citizen. Accept it.
And you have the audacity to question my "loyalty"?
israel does too have designs on Lebanon – didn't it embark on bombing campaign just recently – ostensibly it was a war. In reality it was a punitive action deliberately targeting civilians. That's what israel does there and did in gaza too – ask the IDF, if you don't believe me. In fact, hezbollah behaved far better than israel in so far as civilians are concerned. IMO it is Israel that should be designated a state committed to terror against gentiles – including christians. The proof is in the pudding. Didn't you read Phil's accounts from gaza? Every day the gap between israel and the US increases. Real US citizens can see perfectly well what's going on. Too bad you are an israeli patriot – but hey – to each his own! I hear, BTW, that some fine apartments are becoming available in east jerusalem. They just kicked out a family of 18 on the streets. maybe you can apply for residence there? I understand the view is great!
I also question your loyalty, witty. in a conflict between the US and israel I know which side you'll be, that's obvious from your posts. I have yet to see you put a single positive statement about the US and/or speak to its interests.
Yeah, OK, Richard, "but conducted in a negligent and excessive manner." Translation: Israel is dependent on the US money machine so it must always have a fig leaf over it's operations.
If so, why are you rabidly supporting Israel's aggression and predatory conduct? You say in effect you don't need an insurance policy covering USA assent or descent into "antisemitism" so why constantly argue against the USA's best interests? No real American would accept you as a loyal American citizen. Accept your own choice.
Sorry, I don't beat my wife at all. If the 5th column shoe fits, wear it.
I don't support AIPAC because they support two states. I do think that all aide should be cut off, not only to Israel but also the Arabs, the anti-Israel NGOs and especially the HAMAS in Gaza.
Witty is hard core Jew First. His aim in life is to keep the blood line intact. You cannot be more anti-American than Witty. Well, maybe if you're David Duke you are at least equal.