Should President Obama Suspend Military Aide to Israel?

[Mustang]

Conservatives aren't pacifists. They understand military action is a necessary evil sometimes. It is also understood civilian causalities in times of battle are sometimes unavoidable. Now in this case conservatives are just as outraged by the killing of civilians, they are just pointing the blame in the correct direction, unlike you. No one is making excuses for Israel, because they don't need excuses for doing the right thing. I believe it's you that is overlooking the role Hamas is playing in the death of their own people.

I never stated that I thought any and all military action was unwarranted. But that doesn't mean that this kind of assault was necessary the way it's been conducted.

You see, Israel could have conducted a different kind of military incursion which relied more on ground forces. Such an action could have been more discriminate in choosing targets AND preventing civilian casualties. Instead, Israel chose to rely on air assaults and artillery which was fired from a distance. That kind of assault virtually guaranteed more civilian casualties.

So let me get this straight, in your opinion should have to risk more casualties in order to limit casualties in the Gaza Stripe? It doesn't work that way anywhere in the world. Why are you placing the onus on Israel to limit civilian casualties? Don't you think there would be significantly less casualties if Hamas got rid of their tactics?

Israel has previously occupied both Gaza and the West Bank. They've previously engaged in land action in both areas. They simply made a choice this time to change tactics which would automatically result in more civilian casualties. That was a choice. That means that the high number of civilian casualties is not incidental.

 

[Rocko]

I never stated that I thought any and all military action was unwarranted. But that doesn't mean that this kind of assault was necessary the way it's been conducted.

You see, Israel could have conducted a different kind of military incursion which relied more on ground forces. Such an action could have been more discriminate in choosing targets AND preventing civilian casualties. Instead, Israel chose to rely on air assaults and artillery which was fired from a distance. That kind of assault virtually guaranteed more civilian casualties.

So let me get this straight, in your opinion should have to risk more casualties in order to limit casualties in the Gaza Stripe? It doesn't work that way anywhere in the world. Why are you placing the onus on Israel to limit civilian casualties? Don't you think there would be significantly less casualties if Hamas got rid of their tactics?

Israel has previously occupied both Gaza and the West Bank. They've previously engaged in land action in both areas. They simply made a choice this time to change tactics which would automatically result in more civilian casualties. That was a choice. That means that the high number of civilian casualties is not incidental.

Their choice also results in less of their own military casualties, which is the priority, which is the same priority every nation who's at war has.

 

[Rocko]

That's not a fact. That's a contention.

The fact of the matter is that weapons we provided Israel are being used to engage in what amounts to essentially the indiscriminate killing of civilians not involved in the fighting.

That's not a fact. That's a contention.
BTW, are you getting the poll results you were hoping for?

I split it up to see if there was a schism based on philosophical affiliation. In part, I was interested in that possibility because of something I heard Mark Levin say on his show. Despite the fact that my poll allowed people to self-identify, my poll does NOT seem to bear out Levin's contention that liberals are considerably more likely to side against the Israeli IDF assault.

3 times the amount of conservatives voted no.

 

[Mustang]

Mustang, what's your opinion on this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu54aSM6QOE

Like most people, I'm appalled by it. But then again, I've been appalled by the whole conflict which has dragged on for decades with several generations of families growing up in refugee camps and indiscriminate deaths on both sides as the leaders of both sides don't seem to be serious about reaching a settlement. Instead, they keep the world (and especially America) hostage to their conflict.

But as appalled as I am by the images, it does not justify what Israel is now doing by any stretch of reasoning because Israel is creating widespread human suffering which will only perpetuate the conflict.

 

[Darlene]

May I ask why "political party" has anything to do with this? I selected liberal because of SOME of my beliefs but I have no idea what moderate means. I hardly ever pay attention to politics, but I've been getting a little more involved since I've registered with this site.

 

[deltex1]

Mustang, what's your opinion on this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu54aSM6QOE

If mustang were there she would have shit her pants.

 

[Mustang]

That's not a fact. That's a contention.
BTW, are you getting the poll results you were hoping for?

I split it up to see if there was a schism based on philosophical affiliation. In part, I was interested in that possibility because of something I heard Mark Levin say on his show. Despite the fact that my poll allowed people to self-identify, my poll does NOT seem to bear out Levin's contention that liberals are considerably more likely to side against the Israeli IDF assault.

3 times the amount of conservatives voted no.

I pay more attention to the percentages within each group.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

I repeat.......

Is Canada under a blockade and occupation?

The Palestinians are not under occupation, and what do you think would happen if Israel didn't control their borders, realistically?

It is common knowledge they have been under occupation for more than a decade.

Palestinian-American: 'Living in occupation felt normal' - CNN.com

In the summer of 2000, our lives were flipped upside down by the second intifada, or "the uprising." A 20-something-foot harsh concrete wall was constructed around the West Bank, there were checkpoints installed between towns and villages, and daily clashes between Palestinians and Israeli authorities interrupted our day. We no longer had the liberty to take cabs to Jerusalem, shop in Ramallah or hike in the mountains. Our sense of freedom was stripped away from us.

My family soon discovered that living in fear and under occupation was dangerous and too hostile...

The concern now among top diplomats is whether the cease-fire will hold while Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Benjamin Netanyahu and Hamas leaders work on a long term solution for peace. Israel is demanding an end to rocket fire from Gaza, while Hamas wants an end to Israel's blockade of Gaza and targeted assassinations, the kind that launched Israel's operation "Pillar of Defense."

Cease-Fire Holds Between Hamas, Israel, Hamas Declares Holiday - ABC News

Israel has the right to control its borders all it wants but not to imprison populations elsewhere.

 

[Rocko]

I split it up to see if there was a schism based on philosophical affiliation. In part, I was interested in that possibility because of something I heard Mark Levin say on his show. Despite the fact that my poll allowed people to self-identify, my poll does NOT seem to bear out Levin's contention that liberals are considerably more likely to side against the Israeli IDF assault.

3 times the amount of conservatives voted no.

I pay more attention to the percentages within each group.

You're not getting the whole story then. If you polled every liberal and conservative on this board and expected both to have similar percentages then you're not very familiar with this board. Now I do admit many liberal have come around on this issue, but IMO conservatives are still way ahead.

 

[Rocko]

Is Canada under a blockade and occupation?

The Palestinians are not under occupation, and what do you think would happen if Israel didn't control their borders, realistically?

It is common knowledge they have been under occupation for more than a decade.

Palestinian-American: 'Living in occupation felt normal' - CNN.com

In the summer of 2000, our lives were flipped upside down by the second intifada, or "the uprising." A 20-something-foot harsh concrete wall was constructed around the West Bank, there were checkpoints installed between towns and villages, and daily clashes between Palestinians and Israeli authorities interrupted our day. We no longer had the liberty to take cabs to Jerusalem, shop in Ramallah or hike in the mountains. Our sense of freedom was stripped away from us.

My family soon discovered that living in fear and under occupation was dangerous and too hostile...

The concern now among top diplomats is whether the cease-fire will hold while Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Benjamin Netanyahu and Hamas leaders work on a long term solution for peace. Israel is demanding an end to rocket fire from Gaza, while Hamas wants an end to Israel's blockade of Gaza and targeted assassinations, the kind that launched Israel's operation "Pillar of Defense."

Cease-Fire Holds Between Hamas, Israel, Hamas Declares Holiday - ABC News

Israel has the right to control its borders all it wants but not to imprison populations elsewhere.

If they were truly under occupation they wouldn't be governing themselves, would they?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

In 13 years, do you know how many Israeli citizens have died as a result of rocket attacks? 28. That averages out to about 2 a year.

Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This one incursion into Gaza has killed over 1,400 hundred Palestinians.

Based on that fact alone, this attack is not defensive in nature. And stating it is does not make it so if and when the evidence does not support that claim. This attack has all the earmarks of being a form of retribution that is out of all proportion to the offenses on which it is meant to avenge.

Only 28 Jews? Well, Hell, I guess its okay for Hamas to fire rickets into Jerusalem proper. Carry on.

The point is clear even if you want to pretend it isn't. While the threat from Hamas rockets exists, it's not an existential threat that warrants an all out military assault which kills hundreds of innocent civilians and destroys thousands of homes.

Ok smart ass be specific, how should Israel stop the rockets mortars missiles tunnels and kidnappings?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

How do you know what I hoped. I was merely curious.

um because I've discussed this with you and you made your position clear.

The only position I think I've made clear is that I don't think the concept of principled conservatism holds up to closer scrutiny in the sense that extreme partisans change their so-called principles depending on who the principal players are. I see and hear evidence to back up that theory every single day when it comes to this forum and talk radio.

In THIS particular case, the issue as far as I'm concerned is the sanctity of innocent lives. Conservatives always seem to see the loss of innocent lives at the hands of our adversaries as a violation of human dignity and decency. I agree with that. But, as I suspected, in this case since the assault is being waged by Israel, there's no condemnation of Israeli leadership. MY view is the preventable wholesale loss of life of innocent civilians is reprehensible regardless of which side is pulling the trigger. I wouldn't make excuses for Israel doing it just because they're our ally or because of the holocaust because being the victim of an injustice isn't a license to perpetrate one yourself.

Come on, be SPECIFIC.... how does Israel stop the rockets the mortars and the missiles? How does Israel stop the tunnels, the kidnappings and the murders? You claim it can be done, enlighten us.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

The Palestinians are not under occupation, and what do you think would happen if Israel didn't control their borders, realistically?

It is common knowledge they have been under occupation for more than a decade.

Palestinian-American: 'Living in occupation felt normal' - CNN.com

The concern now among top diplomats is whether the cease-fire will hold while Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Benjamin Netanyahu and Hamas leaders work on a long term solution for peace. Israel is demanding an end to rocket fire from Gaza, while Hamas wants an end to Israel's blockade of Gaza and targeted assassinations, the kind that launched Israel's operation "Pillar of Defense."

Cease-Fire Holds Between Hamas, Israel, Hamas Declares Holiday - ABC News

Israel has the right to control its borders all it wants but not to imprison populations elsewhere.

If they were truly under occupation they wouldn't be governing themselves, would they?

Not really, their government disappeared long ago. The horrible conditions are what allowed hardline Hamas to come to power.

Gaza Strip - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In July 2007, following the 2006 Palestinian legislative election and the Hamas takeover in 2007, Hamas had functioned as the de facto ruler in the Gaza Strip, forming an alternative Hamas Government in Gaza.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

I responded to the poll. But only after I did some research on the subject of aid to Israel to gather some objective evidence before deciding.

The information I needed was found in a 2012 report done by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). It was a real eye opener, and can be viewed here:
http://journalistsresource.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Military-Aid-to-Israel.pdf

I had to go no further than the CRS summary on page 2 to find the information for my decision on the poll.

Findings of significance:

1. "Israel is the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign assistance since World War II."

In other words, the US taxpayer, as Israel's primary benefactor, has foot a good chunk of change over the last 66 years.

2. The 2012 report went on stating, "To date, the United States has provided Israel $115 billion in bilateral assistance."

That average daily aid packet for those first 64 years the US taxpayer has provided to $4.923 million. Oh those poor starving Jewish refugees!

3. Also reported was the future 10-year US aid to Israel. "In 2007, the Bush Administration and the Israeli government agreed to a 10-year, $3 billion military aid package that gradually will raise Israel’s annual Foreign Military Financing grant from a baseline of nearly $2.55 billion in FY2009 to approximately $3.1 billion for FY2013 through FY2018. For FY2013, the Obama Administration is requesting $3.1 billion in FMF to Israel."

That would put the 66 year total, 1948-2014, aid to Israel at somewhere over $121 billion. Those extra two years, 2013 & 2014 bumps the average daily aid packet the US taxpayer has been footing $5.023 million. And that doesn't account for the sums in supplemental aid from Congress like the recent $351 million or that given directly to Israel via the Black Budget. How much infrastructure would that $121+ billion pay for?

So for the poll, this conservative voted to stop further aid to Israel based on the above.

The world OWES Israel, not the other way around. The US makes up the slack, actually, we owe the most for not getting into WWII sooner.

You really must construct a cogent and convincing argument to make that lame duck fly! In an odd quirk in the progression of Karma, the Israelis actually owe the existence of the State of Israel to the victorious US and their allies of WWII and the shrinking of the British Colonial Empire. The cart doesn't pull the horse, does it?

I am not some wacked out fundamentalist who believes that crap in your lead sentence. Nor am I a Brit who believes that BS hang-over from WWII.

Care to convince me that the world owes Israel and how that is connected to the timing of the US entry into WWII?

 

[SAYIT]

In 13 years, do you know how many Israeli citizens have died as a result of rocket attacks? 28. That averages out to about 2 a year.

Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This one incursion into Gaza has killed over 1,400 hundred Palestinians.

Based on that fact alone, this attack is not defensive in nature. And stating it is does not make it so if and when the evidence does not support that claim. This attack has all the earmarks of being a form of retribution that is out of all proportion to the offenses on which it is meant to avenge.

Only 28 Jews? Well, Hell, I guess its okay for Hamas to fire rickets into Jerusalem proper. Carry on.

The point is clear even if you want to pretend it isn't. While the threat from Hamas rockets exists, it's not an existential threat that warrants an all out military assault which kills hundreds of innocent civilians and destroys thousands of homes.

Well, if that is the standard, no IDF incursion has ever been an existential threat to Palestinians. Of course, this one may well turn out to be to Hamas and/or its ability to attack Israel or Israelis.
Hamas's unguided rockets serve no defensive purpose which is to say they are intended for indiscriminate killing only. Imagine that being fired into Texas by Mexican "freedom fighters" every day.

 

[Peach]

I responded to the poll. But only after I did some research on the subject of aid to Israel to gather some objective evidence before deciding.

The information I needed was found in a 2012 report done by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). It was a real eye opener, and can be viewed here:
http://journalistsresource.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Military-Aid-to-Israel.pdf

I had to go no further than the CRS summary on page 2 to find the information for my decision on the poll.

Findings of significance:

1. "Israel is the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign assistance since World War II."

In other words, the US taxpayer, as Israel's primary benefactor, has foot a good chunk of change over the last 66 years.

2. The 2012 report went on stating, "To date, the United States has provided Israel $115 billion in bilateral assistance."

That average daily aid packet for those first 64 years the US taxpayer has provided to $4.923 million. Oh those poor starving Jewish refugees!

3. Also reported was the future 10-year US aid to Israel. "In 2007, the Bush Administration and the Israeli government agreed to a 10-year, $3 billion military aid package that gradually will raise Israel’s annual Foreign Military Financing grant from a baseline of nearly $2.55 billion in FY2009 to approximately $3.1 billion for FY2013 through FY2018. For FY2013, the Obama Administration is requesting $3.1 billion in FMF to Israel."

That would put the 66 year total, 1948-2014, aid to Israel at somewhere over $121 billion. Those extra two years, 2013 & 2014 bumps the average daily aid packet the US taxpayer has been footing $5.023 million. And that doesn't account for the sums in supplemental aid from Congress like the recent $351 million or that given directly to Israel via the Black Budget. How much infrastructure would that $121+ billion pay for?

So for the poll, this conservative voted to stop further aid to Israel based on the above.

The world OWES Israel, not the other way around. The US makes up the slack, actually, we owe the most for not getting into WWII sooner.

You really must construct a cogent and convincing argument to make that lame duck fly! In an odd quirk in the progression of Karma, the Israelis actually owe the existence of the State of Israel to the victorious US and their allies of WWII and the shrinking of the British Colonial Empire. The cart doesn't pull the horse, does it?

I am not some wacked out fundamentalist who believes that crap in your lead sentence. Nor am I a Brit who believes that BS hang-over from WWII.

Care to convince me that the world owes Israel and how that is connected to the timing of the US entry into WWII?

Crimes against humanity the world failed to prevent, and the late US efforts to do so(.)

 

[mudwhistle]

 

[AvgGuyIA]

In 13 years, do you know how many Israeli citizens have died as a result of rocket attacks? 28. That averages out to about 2 a year.

Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This one incursion into Gaza has killed over 1,400 hundred Palestinians.

Based on that fact alone, this attack is not defensive in nature. And stating it is does not make it so if and when the evidence does not support that claim. This attack has all the earmarks of being a form of retribution that is out of all proportion to the offenses on which it is meant to avenge.

Only 28 Jews? Well, Hell, I guess its okay for Hamas to fire rickets into Jerusalem proper. Carry on.

The point is clear even if you want to pretend it isn't. While the threat from Hamas rockets exists, it's not an existential threat that warrants an all out military assault which kills hundreds of innocent civilians and destroys thousands of homes.

You hate Jews. Amazing.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

The world OWES Israel, not the other way around. The US makes up the slack, actually, we owe the most for not getting into WWII sooner.

You really must construct a cogent and convincing argument to make that lame duck fly! In an odd quirk in the progression of Karma, the Israelis actually owe the existence of the State of Israel to the victorious US and their allies of WWII and the shrinking of the British Colonial Empire. The cart doesn't pull the horse, does it?

I am not some wacked out fundamentalist who believes that crap in your lead sentence. Nor am I a Brit who believes that BS hang-over from WWII.

Care to convince me that the world owes Israel and how that is connected to the timing of the US entry into WWII?

Crimes against humanity the world failed to prevent, and the late US efforts to do so(.)

Peach, that is not an argument. It is just another contention lacking any foundation to support a conclusion...the elements of an argument!

 

[The Rabbi]

A picture is worth a thousand words, and the Palestinians have hundreds of pictures of dead children in the wake of the Israeli military assault.

People with small minds are easily swayed by emotional images.

So, you're saying that the people who were moved and swayed by the emotional images of Dachau, Buchenwald, Bergen-Belsen, and Auschwitz had small minds?

No, I'm saying you're a ******* jew hating asshole and your posts on this thread prove it.