Kos, Hezbollah, and Israel Merged with Kos Kids

[Annie]

Sometimes they outdo DU:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/7/24/16036/7495

In defense of violence?
by MakeChessNotWar
Mon Jul 24, 2006 at 01:00:36 PM PDT

I hope that you will refrain from hitting a "troll" button until you have read to the end of this controversial diary. As with most of the Kossack community, I would prefer to achieve political goals through non-violent means. However, there are some circumstances where alternatives do not succeed, and taking up arms is the only path to success.

In this diary I wish to draw some parallels between the current mideast problems and two cases where the world has judged the use of violence to be acceptable: the American Revolution and the French partisans in WW2. Both the revolutionaries and the partisans were treated as terrorists be their oppressors but are universally hailed as heroes by history.

* MakeChessNotWar's diary :: ::
*

Palestine is under the brutal occupation by a racist regime which treats non-Jews as second class citizens. Every illegal invader is a legitimate target, whether roaming the streets or sitting in "settlements". The Palestinians have every right to use the tactics of guerilla warfare to drive the invaders out. The same is true of the Iraqi people. Though these people may not share our democratic values and have an agenda which unacceptably involves forcing people to live under the laws of a designated religion, their inalienable right of self-determination is just as valid as that of our own founders.

It seems to me that we should judge their actions from the same perspective we adopt when we cheer on the Partisans in WW2 films or celebrate our own revolution. This is not to condone terrorism, for we should be horrified if we saw Partisans destroying German civilians, even Nazis, in a ww2 film. I am not defending any actions against civilians, but we should cheer when militants destroy invading tanks or shoot down the planes bombing Lebanese children. We should also cheer destruction of Israeli infrastructure, including telecommunication and transport, just as we do in the movies when Nazi infrastructure is bombed or hit , even if some people do get tragically caught in the crossfire.

It is hypocritical of us to lionize our own guerillas while condemning others for using similar means in similar circumstances, particularly since their oppressors are commiting war crimes and slaughtering civilians in pursuit of their military targets.

We also need to recognize that Hezbollah and Hamas are responsible for a great deal of social services for these oppressed people, and while there may be terrorist activities associated with some factions, any talk of destroying these organizations rather than reforming them is itself a terrorist assault on civilian populations. There is a need to reform these organizations so that they can continue their struggle by political means, but we should recognize that there are times when violent acts may be needed to defend themselves against the atrocities being visited on them by the barbarians in charge of Israel.

Every day we hear about Israel's "right of self-defense", even invoking /Bush's criminal pre-emptive strikes. But I have heard nothing of the right of Palestine or Lebanon's right to defend itself. If Israel stops its ethnic cleansing and slaughter of civilians we should suppoert its right to exist, but until then we should recognize the right of their victms to fight back.

 

[Bonnie]

Will the Liberal Party turn off it's Jewish base??


http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/464esdzr.asp

WHEN THE BOMBS began to fall in the Middle East, the Daily Kos had a problem. And the Daily Kos's problem could soon be the Democratic party's problem.

On the one hand, one of the most solid blocks of support for the Democratic party is America's Jewish community. Not only do America's Jews tend to vote for Democrats, they tend to actively campaign and raise funds for politicians on the left. But for many American Jews, even the most liberal, Israel's welfare is a going concern. Politicians who enter the Democratic party (and for that matter the Republican party) usually make a conspicuous show of the fact that they are "right on Israel."

The vast majority of American political sentiment supports Israel while it is engaged in a shooting war with Hezbollah. To date, not a single prominent American politician has issued a statement that could be construed as being less than whole-heartedly supportive of Israel.

On the other hand, there is the Daily Kos community. As proprietor Markos Moulitsas frequently notes, the Kos community is representative of the "people-powered movement." They are not led by one person; indeed, they are not led at all.

The miracle of the Kossacks is that they are tens of thousands of like-minded people who have used the site to find one another. Although they differ on many details, they tend to monolithically detest George W. Bush and American conservatives. They also tend to distrust or loathe anything or anyone that winds up in Bush's literal or metaphorical
embrace. Like Joe Lieberman. Or Israel.


THE CONFLAGRATION in Lebanon has provided an example of the people-powered movement's potential to be a liability for the politicians who have tried to curry favor with it.

Perhaps sensing that this issue could highlight just how far removed the Kos community is from the American mainstream, Moulitsas and his other front-page bloggers have opted to ignore Israel's war. Combined, the half dozen front-pagers have written exactly one post on the subject. And that post, authored by Moulitsas, simply declared that he wouldn't write anything further on the subject. So while the most important story of the year develops, the nation's leading progressive blog has chosen to focus on the Indiana second district House race between Chris Chocola and Joe Donnelly. Nothing wrong with that; it's their prerogative to blog about whatever they like.

But inside the Kos diaries, it's been a different story. The conversation in the diaries has been overwhelmingly anti-Israel--and potentially disastrous for the Democratic party.

One diarist labeled Israel "a destabilizing force in the region" and saw "no difference between Iran's support of Hezbollah and Hamas in the form of finances and even arms and The United States' financial support of Israel." Before modifying this diary into a more moderate form, the author opened his essay with the declaration, "Israel is showing the entire world why the Iranian President was absolutely right to suggest that Israel cease being a sovereign state as is."

Echoing the themes of moral equivalence and hostility towards the Jewish state, another diarist observed that, "War is nothing but terrorist attacks. Call it what you will, whatever rhetoric you want to use . . . when it comes down to it, that's all it is. Israel committed terrorism today. And we helped to fund that terrorism." [Ellipsis in original.]