If it were two random ethnic groups we wouldn't be giving billions in aid to one of them to kill the other and one of those groups wouldn't have a powerful lobby influencing our governmental policies to get involved. Also, Jews mostly vote Democratic and they voted for Obama who kisses Israeli ass so I don't think it's the clean division you insinuate.
If there was nothing major going on in the Middle East aside from the Israeli conflict, I could definitely understand the overwhelming focus on it. But that isn't true at all, especially at this point. I actually haven't paid nearly as much attention to the Israeli conflict as I think most people have here, because I believe what has been going on and has been continuing to go on in Iraq is much more critical, and frankly a lot more interesting. It's frustrating to me how that has been placed on the backburner in the eyes of the media and the people just because we've got another round of Israel-Palestine fighting and stuff.
Obama isn't in the media and he isn't an internet warrior which is who I said this was a proxy war for. Obama is a politician and the leader of the country. He has to deal with real world problems like American interests in the middle east, political maneuvering for elections, long term military base locations, etc. For him the conflict doesn't get to be an intellectual experiment and a gotcha game. For the media and internet warriors it does.
I don't think giving Israel a blank check and carte Blanche to do what it wants helps our interests in the Middle East. In fact I'd say the exact opposite. We have no military bases in Israel that I'm aware. Obama probably does have to kiss ass to maintain political contribution levels from Jewish lobbyists so I'll agree with you there. I don't check with the New York Times op ed on what I feel is right and wrong in politics. I don't see it as an intellectual experiment. Conservatives by their recent history are extremely hawkish and certainly have shown to be anti anyone not Christian. This fits right into their wheelhouse. If the US weren't bankrolling this whole thing then yes, I'd feel less outraged about it because we wouldn't be responsible for it. I'd still see the injustice in it but I wouldn't feel as connected to it.
It is understandable you would try to side track with a quote technique issue. You are just restating your previous complaint of feeling dissed by liberals and your assumption that liberals just support Palestinian liberation due to it being a chance to oppose conservatives.to which I was responding. Please try to explain with arguments or evidence your belief that liberals only supported Anti-Apartheid and the Civil Rights Movements or were against the Iraq War and Israeli expansionism due primarily to a chance to make conservatives feel dumb and unenlightened.
Seriously, please try to make your posts readable. It's not that hard, everyone else manages to do it.
It wasn't an attempt to side track when I continued to respond to you. Now, watch how I continue to quote you... 1) Domestic issues are irrelevant as most people care about their own domestic issues, so I will ignore Iraq and the Civil Rights movement 2) I didn't say it was to make conservatives feel dumb and unenlightened I said it was to make liberals feel enlightened. 3) People love causes that give them a chance to grandstand, look smart and take on someone they see as inferior in a debate. Oh, and I don't feel dissed by liberals. I don't have a strong stance on the Israeli situation other than their right to defend themselves. The rest of it (two state solution, long history of occupation, settlements, etc.) is one giant cluster with no solution that I can come up with. I don't put a lot of thought into it nor do I spend much time researching it. That's for better minds, problem solving minds, minds that are respected contributors. Like you Glynch. Your internet campaign against capitalism and the evil imperialists are surely bearing fruit by now.
I will try to not be so hard or take your posts seriously since you admit to being pretty uninformed.
Fine, whether they are separate or not is not the point of the discussion. The point is that Israel not so long ago engaged in ethnic cleansing and you are white-washing that out as having any kind of context to the current conflict.
I linked to it in my first post about it. It listed a number of villages captured by (soon to be Israeli) Zionist forces vs. the zero captured by Palestinian forces. But I will post some more about it if you wish. http://www.nytimes.com/1988/08/02/o...ssin-spurred-palestinians-to-flee-507288.html Here's something else about one of the massacres that happened about 1 month before Israel was officially a state. http://www.deiryassin.org/mas.html
How is the fact that Israel conquered the land from the people that previously conquered the land relevant today?
LOL did you think that the people that named themselves "Palestinians" in the mid 20th century always lived there? Thet land has changed hands via conquest numerous times over the years and several different people have called that land theirs. Do you think they just politely asked the previous "owners" to leave? Labeling this conquest "ethnic cleansing" doesn't make it any different than those that happened previously.
A funny thing about conquering a land. Sometimes groups that already lived there conquered the ruling group that lived there. Just because they conquered the land doesn't mean they weren't from there.
Usually the people are moved out or killed, sure not every single time that the land was conquered did that happen, but it did happen several times.
So it's ok if Native Americans decide in 2000 years to come back and wipe out all Americans in the U.S. and push them into a small sliver of the Mojave desert right?
I never said anything would be "ok" but if they had the power to do so, then it wouldn't surprise me if it happened. I'd hope Americans would be a lot more intelligent than Palestinians about it though. Odds are they'd either move on to another place or create peace and build things back up there. Reality is what matters, not some abstract idea of morality. When you lose, you should lose intelligently.
