Wow.. I usually can't stand Buchanan.. but I am 100% with him this time.

>> ^honkeytonk73:
Wow.. I usually can't stand Buchanan.. but I am 100% with him this time.


That should be clue for you when you find yourself cheerleader for Pat Buchanan: Maybe your current opinion is seriously off-base.

Listen to Cliff May. He makes sense.

"They could have built hotels on the beaches of Gaza"

ummm how could they do that when they have abject poverty and food/water/fuel/medicine all rationed and controlled by Israel who frequently refuses to let basic supplies enter the region.

That's saying someone can have a free state inside a prison.

How do you get investment when your prison guard wont recognize your people as a nation.

Also... how is it a war crime for hamas to shelter with their families but not a war crime for Israel to fire on the women and children?

If they didnt - if they had army barracks: they would be killed indiscriminately without mercy or taking of prisoners it would be suicide.

...and if there was no Hamas and no resistance what would happen? Israeli settlers would have nothing to fear...they would once again start claiming land and taking it with tanks.

Holy sh!t, I too agree with Buchanan. There is a first for everything.

The other guy is a shill for Hasbara.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasbara

and the neocons.

http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1296.html

"They could have built hotels on the beaches of Gaza"

Good points, Raverman. Never mind that the beaches are polluted by raw sewerage from the Israeli side of the border. Another well documented fact that often isn't mentioned.

U.S. news networks are a joke. They failed to mention that the UN driver was shot and killed by Israeli soldiers.

Oh and by the way, Clifford May is vice-chair of the Republican Jewish Coalition.

>> ^campionidelmondo:
U.S. news networks are a joke. They failed to mention that the UN driver was shot and killed by Israeli soldiers.
Oh and by the way, Clifford May is vice-chair of the Republican Jewish Coalition.

OMG, He's a Jew?!?
Get a rope!
lol
You sound just as racist as Pat Buchanan.

>> ^mharvey42:
>> ^campionidelmondo:
U.S. news networks are a joke. They failed to mention that the UN driver was shot and killed by Israeli soldiers.
Oh and by the way, Clifford May is vice-chair of the Republican Jewish Coalition.

OMG, He's a Jew?!?
Get a rope!
lol
You sound just as racist as Pat Buchanan.


Are you so desperate to make a point? Being a vice-chair of a coalition might show some bias, don't you think?

You are irrationally and fervently set in your ways. Seeing your rash of comments lately makes me think that you are akin to a fundamentalist in the way that you will hold onto your beliefs no matter what facts come out. No matter the context or source, you will latch onto anything that supports your beliefs and dismiss anything that undermines them. Oh yes, everyone acts that way to some degree, but you win a prize.

What prize you ask? You win exclusive access to list that has remained untouched. Yes, you are the first and probably only person to go on it.

Welcome to my ignore list.

Why is it racist to support Palestinians rather than Israel?

Just because they're Jewish doesn't make it racist not to support them.
If anyone is an opposed minority it's the Palestinians.

Why is Pat Buchanan a racist?
...for objecting to the slaughter of hundreds of civilians? or for objecting to it when Israel is doing it?

Would it be OK if Russia was invading Georgia and killing hundreds of civilians who got in the way of trying to kill terrorists?

Who's the bearded asshole?

I feel like punching something today, and he seems like the perfect candidate.

LOL.. I don't think anyone has ever made it faster to ignore lists, and that includes a lot of people. This harvey guy keeps making ridiculous statements that keep showing how weak this Israeli side really is.

Pat Buchanan is probably a little racist, but mostly if you are black and in the US. I can't see anything he said here that is anti-Jew and I love how you have zero defending this absurd behavior by the Israelis.

Copy and paste this, because it is all your are left with.
- you must be an anti-semite
- it's all Hamas fault
- Palestinians could have ended this and had fabulous lifestyle of luxury
- Hamas hides behind human shields
- israel can't help bombing them, it's for everyone's good
- israel can't help bombing schools, they are hiding in there


Yes, Israel did help create Hamas to undermine the previous political support, but the US also created Bin Laden with money and CIA training. Clearly, it is a country's right to go bomb the hell out of their Frankenstein's monster when it goes all haywire. Who cares what country that happens to be in.

>> ^joedirt:
Pat Buchanan is probably a little racist, but mostly if you are black and in the US. I can't see anything he said here that is anti-Jew and I love how you have zero defending this absurd behavior by the Israelis.

Here you go Dirt, do your homework. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Buchanan#Accusations_of_Anti-Semitism
assuming this wasn't a plant by the "Zionist Occupied Government", it may shed some light on your new hero.

And Wtf - It's OK if he's only "a little racist", and just hates blacks? Strange bedfellows you have Dirt.

Bush's diplomatic ineptitude in dealing with Palestine has created the conditions for Hamas to come to power. They are a terrorist faction and Israel needs to defend themselves. I hate to pin yet another failure on Bush -- with such a disastrous laundry list of FAILURES connected to him as it is -- but the fact of the matter is, the U.S. serves a diplomatic role for Israel in the Middle East and Bush's staunch pro-Israel / anti-Palestine position these past eight years has functioned, primarily, as a yet another example of black-and-white thinking which characterize most of the failures during his administration.

Oh, and Pat Buchanan failed to mention the concentration camp the U.S. maintained with the Japanese during WW II.

Ok mharvey, I'll bite... That wikipedia page has to be the weakest "proof" of anti-semitism and I guess it shows that when Israel defenders run into anything even remotely approaching a valid argument they start throwing out this stigma of anti-semite.

The first widespread accusations of anti-Semitism against Buchanan concerned the September 15, 1990, McLaughlin Group program.[124] On it, Buchanan said that "there are only two groups that are beating the drums for war in the Middle East -- the Israeli defense ministry and its 'amen corner' in the United States."[124] He also said, "The Israelis want this war desperately because they want the United States to destroy the Iraqi war machine. They want us to finish them off. They don't care about our relations with the Arab world."[124]

They have stoped the fucking missles faggot!

Whoa leftfield Kidney punch!

Good comment Joe.

Am I an anti semite if I say "Fuck the Jews"?

im i an anti-semite if i point out that 10 israelis have been killed by hamas rockets the last 8 yrs, while 300 non-israeli children have been killed in few days, during the targeting of hamas? thats some fuckin awful targeting.....

Tags for this video have been changed from 'gaza, concetration camps, Pat Buchanan' to 'gaza, concentration camps, Pat Buchanan' - edited by xxovercastxx

No, it doesn't make you an anti-semite, tofu.

Consider though that it's actually relatively good targeting - what's the ratio of combatants to noncombatants in the warzone?

Compare that and the amount of fire being directed into the front against other conflicts over the past 20 years, and you will likely come to the conclusion that, as wars go (and all wars are terrible), this war is being prosecuted with relative care.

And Joe Dirt, you can belittle those statements as much as you like, but it doesn't negate their truth.

Who prevented the residents of Gaza from pursuing peace? They knew what Hamas would do! They fully supported strikes against Israel. Hamas can't afford to sign a peace agreement with Israel at this point because it would look weak to not only Fatah but to its own constituency; the people of Gaza.

Why are you all so surprised at what Buchanan is saying? He's always been criticizing Israel.

Buchanan has always been non interventionist. He's also remarkably pro-worker for a Repub.

Help me out Yehoshua.

What are Israel's long term goals here? Do they think that if they can kill every member of Hamas that all of their troubles will go away? Do they think the root of this problem is mere 'terrorism'? Are they trying to make Gaza so horrible that everyone will leave?

It seems to me that as long as Palestinians lack hope and have nothing to lose, you are always going to find a small percentage willing to strap on a bomb or launch a rocket.

It seems that Israel's options are a) Give the Palestinians a homeland or b) Genocide

Are there other options? Is there something I am missing here, or is this all as short sighted as it looks?

I hear a lot of 'but they started it', 'but they're worse', 'they want to kill us, so we need to kill them first' talk out of the Israeli camp. Is this just a pissing contest? Bloods and Crips east?

Is this leading to any kind of rational conclusion?

Do you have any empathy for the innocent Palestinians that are being killed by the Israeli military? Is an innocent Israeli dead at the hands of Hamas any worse than an innocent Palestinian dead at the hands of Israel's military? Isn't all of this aggression intended to terrorize?

I hear the frustration in your voice and don't mean to attack you, these are just some questions I'd like to hear answered.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:
Help me out Yehoshua.
What are Israel's long term goals here? Do they think that if they can kill every member of Hamas that all of their troubles will go away?

Nope, they just want to kill anyone who has or will ever vote for a group like Hamas.

But the real answer is much more Ockham's.. The long term goal is really just the ruling party's short term goal of getting re-elected. They looked foolish and got their arse handed to them, so now they are showing they can be tough against Arabs, even if they causing long term problems.

"Hamas can't afford to sign a peace agreement with Israel at this point because it would look weak to not only Fatah but to its own constituency; the people of Gaza."

Have you been following the news over the past week? You do know that Hamas was ready for another cease fire. You know who wasn't? You know who after pissing off the UN and RC by killing their drivers.. after bombing UN schools.. do you know who is bragging that he called up Bush and told Condi to abstain from voting on her own proposal? (I don't know the truth, only that he is bragging that he did it).

If Israel cared about they "terrible" rockets they would went for a cease fire. They not only provoked Hamas into this Nov/Dec rockets, but are pushing this current campaign of death to keep going.

Does anyone have any suggestions on how to stop the rocket fire if you are Israel? Seriously?

So far I see a lot of people objecting to Israel doing what they've been threatening to do for years.. and Hamas has been DARING them too. Israel called their bluff, and now the rocketmen are hiding amongst civilians.

Should, like the man said, Israel just throw up their hands and say, ok, you're right... keep firing missiles until you get tired of it, we'll just sit here and take it??

Well, we both know, and Israel knows, that nearly all of the people in Gaza can't leave. All of the nations in the middle east, friend to Israel or friend to any faction of the Palestinians, will not accept any large number of refugees beyond those already present in their country (and are in fact unlikely to grant citizenship to the refugees already there).

Honestly, I think that there is no and never was a clear consensus amongst Israeli leadership as to the exit strategy for this campaign. I think everyone involved agreed that some form of military response was necessary/called for, and that they all had and have different ideas of how they want it to end.

Hamas is in the position of balancing further casualties and suffering amongst their members and constituency against the possible goodwill they can gain in the region by mimicking Lebanon's performance in the previous war.

To be entirely blunt, the Palestinians in Gaza (including Hamas) have been losing a lot, and stand to lose a lot more if the IDF pushes forward.
I think the likely "out" in the near term (and possibly the endgame that a majority of Israeli leadership is pursuing) is that a sufficiently large majority of Hamas operatives in Gaza will decide that it is in their best interests to reach a compromise that accedes to some but not all of Israel's demands.

Joedirt, Hamas leadership in Syria has consistently refused a ceasefire without Israel first completely withdrawing, which I think is rather unrealistic.
This Arabic daily criticizes Hamas leadership for obstructing cease-fire negotiations (see the bottom) http://aawsat.com/english/news.asp?section=2&id=15352
Here's the Telegraph, saying that there is division as to a cease-fire between the Syrian leadership of Hamas and the leadership on the ground in Gaza http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/palestinianauthority/4240932/Analysis-The-choices-confronting-Hamas.html

In the long term? Personally, I had been thinking that unilateral distancing by Israel was a positive step towards peace. However, if Israel leaves open any significant access to Palestinian territories, additional weapons or weapon-precursors will enter the region and be used against Israel.
As we have seen, Palestinian militants will tunnel or otherwise attempt to circumvent even relatively thorough security procedures put in place by Israel.
This leaves Israel in the unenviable position of deciding whether to leave the Palestinians with relatively open borders, and suffer proportionately more attacks, or completely isolate Gaza (and probably the West Bank as well) in a truly thorough fashion.

This is a classic asymmetric warfare situation, which historically have been very bloody and nigh-impossible to end peacefully. I don't know of any historic examples that didn't end in the militarily superior power either pulling out completely ala Russia in Afghanistan or the U.S. in Vietnam (not a realistic or moral option here) or committing genocide as in many Medieval and Colonial conflicts (also not a realistic or moral option).

To end this before it gets any longer, simply giving the Palestinians a homeland will not bring peace to the region as long as a significant portion of the Palestinian population is willing to pursue the destruction of the state of Israel via violent means.

I do not dispute that there have been a number of bad actors affiliated with Israel. However, I believe from personal experience that the vast majority of Israelis would be happy for the Palestinians to have their own state, but also believe that many Palestinians would continue to pursue the violent destruction of Israel even if they had full sovereignty.