I am so upset about Gaza

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-20-1999
I am so upset about Gaza
332
Sun, 01-11-2009 - 10:14pm

I can't quite express how much this has upset me.

Sucker Punch

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-07-2008
Thu, 01-15-2009 - 1:36am

>>I guess that means they shouldn't be starting fights with the Isrealis.<<


Yeah, best they just die and reduce the surplus population.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-09-2009
Thu, 01-15-2009 - 1:44am

>>> There appears to be an assumption that, just because many key Democrats also bought into the arrant ignorance, those who opposed the war from its onset should accept the Democratic participation as proof positive of certain unproved premises. Illogical. Non sequitur. It should NEVER be the assumption, in a healthy democracy, that our leaders are omniscient and always judicious. They were WRONG then but some had the courage to admit it.

Actually, it seems to come down to "intelligence." Your Democrat leadership had access to it and found it compelling, while those on the far left did not but were content to make up their minds based on propaganda. Personally, I think I'll go with the folks who actually had access to the relevant information and an understanding of the history, over those who ignorantly cling to an ideology.

>>> In contrast, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and far too many other toadies never took responsibility for their fatal preoccupation with Saddam and the arrogance of assuming that our military might would make their ambitions and nit-witted plans right.

LOL! "Toadies" like Bill Clinton who was so fatally preoccupied with Saddam that he PREEMPTIVELY bombed Iraq to get those mean ol' WMDs and nuclear weapons? Imagine the arrogance of assuming that our military might would make his ambitions and nit-witted plans right! Yes, Clinton is obviously as guilty as Bush is, so he should be held just as accountable...let the prosecutions begin.

>>> UN inspections had RESUMED in 2002 and inspectors begged to be allowed to continue their efforts.

Actually, they didn't beg...but rather asked for as much as another year because they were "making progress." The left seems unable to comprehend that the UN didn't "ask" Hussein to allow inspections when he "got around to it" and under terms that he found agreeable. The UN demanded IMMEDIATE compliance. When Hussein refused, Bush was forced to take action.

>>> In fact, the same Scott Ritter you quote in 1998 has repeatedly asserted that Saddam did NOT have anything which constituted WMD. Recently, he said this: "Over seven years of UN-mandated weapons inspection activity, conducted from 1991 until 1998, had produced a well-defined (and documented) record of disarmament which, while not providing absolute verification of the disposition of every aspect of Saddam's WMD programmes, did allow any observer interested in the facts to ascertain that Iraq was fundamentally disarmed from a qualitative perspective. This, coupled with the presence of the world's most technologically advanced and intrusive arms control regime monitoring the totality of Iraq's industrial infrastructure, provided a high degree of confidence that Saddam had neither retained nor reconstituted his WMD programme.>>
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2008/dec/02/george-bush-iraq-wmd

Hmmm...I wonder how Ritter arrived at this 180º flip-flop? Was he permitted access to perform additional inspections? Um...no. Was Hans Blix able to perform unfettered inspections and provide Ritter with new information? Um...no. So where oh were did Ritter get the information that totally contradicted his previous assessment? Hmmm...could Ritter by lying to make himself look better? Hmmm...

>>> Near as I can tell, the primary thrust of your argument appears to be that Democrats and Clinton believed that Saddam presented a threat so BushCo was merely taking the premise (NOT A FACT) a bit further, enhancing it more than a little with statements implying a link to 9/11, and using the whole sorry house-built-on-sand as the basis on which to wage a war of aggression. There is a vast chasm between "supporting regime change" and the unprovoked invasion of a sovereign nation. At least Clinton had the intelligence to avoid bogging us down in a war/occupation of attrition.

Yeah, that's it...you know "Crazy Bill." I guess I was expecting a lot, asking for an honest assessment of reality from liberals. I mean, who cares if TWO SEPARATE ADMINISTRATIONS of our government perceived a threat to national security from the same source. That's nothing compared to the magical mind-reading powers of moonbats who are long on ideology and very, very short on facts.

What the fringe-dwellers are also short on are explanations as to why the UNSC unanimously declared innocent ol' Saddam to be a threat...or why the Democrats supported a war against a peaceful Iraq...or how these tactical geniuses would have addressed the Iraq threat in a way that didn't require military intervention. Strange, isn't it? No, not when you understand that the "critical thinking" comes from the left.

As for the rest of the "blah, blah, blah"... I won't even waste my time reading the tripe. As I said, expecting honesty from the left is overreaching under the best of circumstances.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-09-2009
Thu, 01-15-2009 - 1:59am

>>> Palestinians lack the ability to exterminate Israel, so saying they are "trying to do so" as if that were a serious threat is silly.

Wow...dead innocent Jews...how silly!

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-09-2009
Thu, 01-15-2009 - 2:43am

>>> But surrender? How? Did you think there were Israelis soldiers in the streets asking for the civilians of Gaza to surrender? Did you think they launched the missle attacks that killed this woman from next door and all she had to do was wave a white flag and they'd have taken her children and her ---- where?

Well, lessee...hmmm...how about walking unarmed to the Israel border and turning yourself in to the Israeli army BEFORE the incursion? Wait...that can't work...it makes too much sense!

>>> They aren't bringing folks out into Israel, Egypt hasn't opened the borders. The UN camps and the Red Cross stations were some of the earliest targets.

You're suggesting that Israel targeted "innocent" Red Cross stations and UN camps? Why would they do that?

>>> Who do you think is accepting the responsiblity of those who'd surrender

I imagine that the Israeli army has a process for taking prisoners and refugees.

>>> (and from what, this nurse and her family weren't firing rockets into Israel, they didn't do anything wrong except try to live their lives and, in the case of the nurse, to heal others.)

Possibly...but then, how "innocent" were the German people in 1937? I guess we were evil to have bombed those poor folks, weren't we?

>>They are finally protecting themselves.<<

>>> 13 dead israelis of a population of 7 million. 1,000 dead Gazans of a population of 400,000. The Israelis are "protecting" themselves at a rate of 1346 to one. That isn't self-defense, its genocide. To give you a sense? If we decided to "protect ourselves" in a similar fashion, we'd have needed to kill over 4 million people in response to the attacks on the twin towers on 9/11.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-09-2009
Thu, 01-15-2009 - 2:46am

>>Odd then that there are no videos of such deplorable comments from pro-Israels...but lots of comments from the pro-Palestinians. Why do you think that is?<<

>>> I'd say you weren't looking very hard. But then I lived in Israel too. You don't have to look hard when you are there.

I was referring to the Florida confrontation, but since you've provided so many links to back up your claims...uh...er...but wait, there are no links.

>>What seems to be missing on the Israel side, however, are attempts to make them come true.<<

>>> 13 Israelis have died at the hands of Gazans, out of a population of 7 million. 1,000 Gazans have died at the hands if Israelis, out of a population of 400,000.

When your family is among the 13 then get back to me about how insignificant the number is.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-09-2009
Thu, 01-15-2009 - 2:48am
You're not French, are you?
iVillage Member
Registered: 01-09-2009
Thu, 01-15-2009 - 2:58am

>>> They were told to leave before completion of inspections so that they wouldn't be harmed when Bush started his invasion. I guess it was a case of "giveth and taketh away":

They were removed because Hussein refused to allow the IMMEDIATE inspections demanded by the UN. Hussein hijacked the inspection process for months. Bush had two choices...to back down and have the US look like a cowardly "paper tiger," as the left would have liked...or to act with strength and integrity and be as good as his word...which conservatives support.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-09-2009
Thu, 01-15-2009 - 3:05am
Hey, didn't you know that there was no history in Liberamerica before Bush took office? And after Bush took office, it's liberal doctrine that Bush was at fault for everything "bad"...until the coming of the Obamessiah, of course.
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-24-2008
Thu, 01-15-2009 - 3:12am
I disagree. The rockets are to wipe out Israel, and that includes women and children. Obviously, I don't know the number of children killed by the rockets from either side. I also don't know the number of Israeli children killed by suicide bombers, or by their school bus's being shot at. No, I don't believe the Israeli children being targeted by Palestinians, have anything to do with anything other than their desire to kill Jews. It seems pretty cowardly for Palestine to target areas where there are mostly women and children. Israel has not tried to control what nor how, the press reports what they are doing. Your sarcastic remark seemed to imply that they are. That was a very telling comment, with an obvious bias. It is Israel who is retaliating for the attacks on them, not Palestine retaliating. They are the ones who refuse to compromise. They say they could never live along side Israel..not the other way around.
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-24-2008
Thu, 01-15-2009 - 3:27am
Yes, I agree both sides carry some of the burden. In a few of my replies, I have said as much. Israel is certainly not innocent. However, Israel doesn't want to destroy Palestine...only Hamas, and understandably so. As I have said before, I hope with the new elections, both sides will vote in more moderate leaders. Leaders who will sit down and come to compromises, so they can live together peacefully.

Pages