Yes, 77 years old and going strong! Nope, not a thought leader, just a fairly smart guy who thinks differently and independently from the herd.
Jimmy Dore Has A Change Of Mind
- Thread starter Ponca Dan
- Start date
If we can I'd like to get back to the original topic, the genocide of Palestinians by Israel. I may be reading you wrong, but it seems your main reason for agreeing with the slaughter is because of the savage way the Israeli people were murdered by the Hamas thugs on Oct. 7. While I agree with your hatred of the savagery I'm a little perplexed why that seems to be what has you so willing to support Israel while it indiscriminately kills Palestinians at will. I am under the impression that as long as innocent people are killed the "old fashioned" way: bombed into pieces of body, crushed by collapsed homes, shot in the street as they flee, congregate in spaces they have been assured are "safe and will not be bombed" only to be bombed while there, too, die from stavation, dehydration, lack of medical access, etc. - you know, the all the things Israel is doing, that is justified and approved by the US government, you are quite satisfied that is the proper way to kill innocents in a war. You know, unfortunate collateral damage. If the IDF says it kills 50 non-Hamas people in order to get to one Hamas member, you find that to be a proper war tactic. But what Hamas did is unforgivable (on that I agree and have said so multiple times on this board), way over the top, completely out of bounds of proper war killing. That's what it seems to me you are saying, and I recognize I could be seriously wrong. So I would ask that you put yourself on record of what it is the IDF is doing that you find to be justifiable and how that differs from what Hamas did from the sheer perspective of killing people in a war.
How would you preferred the US to react to Saddam's invasion of Kuwait, gassing the Kurds and defying an international no fly zone? You don't want military actions, you don't like sanctions and pretty please doesn't work s what would you do to reign in the terror? Or do you just want to bitch about it.
Sure be happy to, how would you handle considering you seem to think you are smarter than all of us. Keep in mind your solution has to provide Israelis no longer suffer organized attacks by the Palestinians from this day forward.
My preference is to applaud you and slap you on the back as you climb into a commercial plane, the ticket paid for by you, headed to Iraq in your new uniform and tactical gear, which you bought with your own money, intent on going over there to show him he's made you mad as hell and your aren't going to take it any more. The Saudi Arabians killed far more Yemenis (using our weaponry) and caused one of the greatest famines in recent history, killing tens of thousands of people, many of them innocent civilians. Did you want us to send troops to attack Saudi Arabia? I'll take you answer off line.
Last edited:
Exactly what I thought, you have no solution you merely want to bitch about US foreign policy.
I'm glad you asked. Many people, on this board and elsewhere, have justified the genocide by insisting "Israel has a right to defend itself." I couldn't agree more! Why didn't it defend itself on Oct. 7 when it mattered the most? We have been told many many times that Israel is surrounded by people that hate them and want them dead, and because of that they have to be ever vigilant. Where was the vigilance on Oct. 7? We know that Israel was made well aware that Hamas was up to something "big." Why did it let its guard down, send its troops miles away and take seven hours to respond after the attack began? Why did it use the "Hannibal Option" and kill every living thing it saw, including its own citizens? Why was it not there to protect a music fesival right at the border? That's the time Israel should have been protecting itself. Why didn't it? What it's doing now is not protecting itself, it's on a revenge mission to annhilate every Palestinian it encounters no matter whether they had anything to do with the attack or not. I've said this before and I'll keep saying it. Israel needs to get out of Gaza, get out of the West Bank, both lands legally belong to the Palestinians, leave them the hell alone, build an impenatrable wall with no gates, no access between the countries, double and triple up on the Iron Dome. Leave them to their own devices. "Sink or swim, we're done with you."
Damned right I bitch about US foreign policy! Your solution seems to be using other people's children, boys and girls, to go kill and be killed in a foreign land because the government there offended your perspective on what it should be doing. If you don't have the stones to do it yourself that's a pretty cowardly perspective.
I'll tell you the same thing I told my son when he was going to enter the Marine Corp after graduating OSU. No way in hell I would go into the military, our politicians are pussies and will not allow you to do what is necessary to win. Change that and I would have no problem entering the military myself, although the military probably wouldn't want me at my age but I would be willing.
If the Palestinians are the peace-loving people you say they are, why would Israel need to protect against anything if they did what you said? The fact of the matter whether you want to admit it or not, the Palestinians and much of the Muslim world hate the fact the Jewish people are in Israel and are even alive.
I have no illusions about the "peace-loving" nature of Palestinians. I won't attempt to speak for the rest of the Arab world - I shouldn't even be speaking for the Palestinians - but IMO the Palestinians have every right to hate the Israelis, at least hate the way they have been forced to live under their contemptible control for the last 75 years. And it probably would take a generation or two or three for the hatred to dissipate to any degree. Thus Israel should take every precaution to protect itself. But I think if Israel stayed out of their affairs the main reason for hating them would eventually diminsh. One thing is for sure: the way Israel acts toward the Palestinians has not been moving the area toward peace. It's an age old moral mistake to think the way to work toward relieving hatred is to do things that engender it.
Now you're making less sense than usual. On the one hand you don't think people should join what you think is a pussified military, while on the other hand you want to send those same pussified soldiers into harm's way when it suits you.
Last edited:
Yes, I think the hatred will begin to dimish after a couple of generations realize they don't have to look over their shoulder in anticipation of an IDF squadron barrelling down the road on the way to jerk someone out of his house and keep him locked up without charges for as long as it suits them. I doubt the hatred will ever go away completely - by either side. Much like I think the intense hatred most of us OSU fans have for OU football will begin to dimish once the Sooners are in the SEC for awhile and we don't have to have our noses rubbed into their supposed greatness every year. How many generations after the American Civil War did it take before we decided to live and let live again?
My assumption was correct, you think Israel should sit back, take it and do nothing after the next October 7th.
That is a bit revisionist. To my knowledge, we did not use weapons of mass destruction during the Iraq war, and I was there. I give you the "to my knowledge" in this case because I don't trust the government. There is always the chance I missed something.
Sadam certainly did have WMD, which he dropped on his own people.
https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ei/rls/18714.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/march/16/newsid_4304000/4304853.stm
What happened to it? Where did it go, if when we invaded Iraq there was no WMD found? If he destroyed it, he would have let the inspectors in. So what happened to the gas that he used against his own people, he obviously had it, because he used it.
Its not a bad question. Its a matter of sending a message of this type of behavior will not be tolerated at all. The message back has to be you do this, and that power difference you like to note will be used to stop it. I can write more later.
Your assumption is wildly incorrect. What part of having an impenatrable wall and double-triple on the Iron Dome escapes you? Not to mention my concern that Israel always be on alert, vigilant 24/7/52? Which was obviously missing on Oct 7. And, no, I do not think Israel should sit back and take it, have never thought that and never hinted at that. What I do think is Israel's standard tactic is to return fire for fire at ten times the original, coupled with unceasing abuse of the Palestinian population just for general princples, and that has not resolved their problem, only exacerbated it. It is not unreasonable to suggest they try a different approach.
By the way I'm sure you're concerned if Israel withdraws all connection with Gaza (and the Western Bank) the Palestinians will use the reprieve to fire rockets at them (which is why they should double up on Iron Dome). And that very well may happen. The solution there is to have the UN deploy peace keepers on the ground seeing that it is kept to a minimum (Assuming they can't stop it completely. But let's face it, Israel hasn't stopped it either.).
Last edited:
I made the same point in the previous comment to Bearcat, but the "message" you are advocating has been used by Israel for decades, and it has provided nothing but increased tension. Maybe Israel should figure out it's a bad solution.
I don't know that anything we used is technically considered WMD, but the result was the same, surely you agree with that.
Addendum: I just did a 10 second Google search and found Sadam gassed and murdered 30,000+ of his own people. The death counts for how many Iraqis the USA killed ranged from 151,00"violent" deaths (whatever that means) to 1,033,000 "excess" deaths. I would consider those numbers, assuming they are accurate, to be evidence that our killings may not be from using WMD, but it killed those people anyway.
Addendum 2: As regards Sadam's WMD there were no WMD found once he was killed and the allies took over. You insist he had them, he gassed his own people with them, of that there is no rebuttal. But there is also no rebuttal that any weren't found after the fact. What happened to them? Who knows. Maybe he had used it all up on the occasions he employed them.
Last edited:
Yes you do think Israel should sit back and take it. Everything in your post never once have you mentioned holding the Palestinians accountable for their violence. It's always Israel should do better defending itself and not be involved in Gaza in any manner. We see that same attitude here in the US with the defund police movement, how's that working out?
Let’s use an analogy. A guy gets a new puppy and the minute he gets home with it he takes out a cane and starts beating it. And continues to beat it any time the dog snaps at him out of sheer desperation. And then the man tells you what a victim he has been because the dog nips at his ankles. Now you know that he has abused the dog mercilessly for its entire life but you ignore that part of the relationship and tell yourself what a violent creature the dog is and encourage the man to beat the dog worse than ever. And if someone comes along and suggests it might be better if the man quit beating the dog and leave it alone you become incensed at the advice and claim the man has never been anything but loving and kind and generous to the dog (even though you know the truth) and the dog repays all the loving kindness by trying to bite the man. Why hasn’t he told the dog to quit snapping at its abuser when he approaches with cane in hand? I hope this isn’t too complicated for you to put two and two together and identify which character in the analogy is the man, which is the abused dog and which is the advice giver. I’m sure you understand that you are the “you” in the analogy.
Was the dog Muslim Dan? Bad analogy. I think you've been watching too many ASPCA commercials.
Last edited:
Wrong analogy to use with me. I'm a dog lover, had them my entire life and they are like our kids but if one of my dog bites a human for any reason it goes away. If I can't trust them not to bite, I have no use for them.
I hate to tell you this out Western nations have fighting with one hand behind our back. We were never allowed to use the full force of our power, even during the Iraq war. Israel has had its hands tied as well. The message is do this and the gloves are off. You can't afford not to. If you don't you just green lighted more operations exactly like Oct 7th. No, I don't care about further tensions, I strictly care about the brutality of the attack by Hamas. This cannot happen again.
No I don't agree with that. WMD changes the battlefield and are much more deadly with no regard for anything. You might as well carpet bomb the entire country. Then you might get the same result.
The 10 sec search was not nearly long enough or Indepth enough. Sadam did this on multiple occasions. I have read civilian agency's report anywhere from 100,000 to 300,000 and the body count is hard to achieve properly. I know he killed at least 50,000 in one strike alone.
Excess deaths are deaths during the war not related to combat. War will inevitably kill civilians as they will be deprived of normal food/water recourses, and medical care. That being said many of the organizations that tried to do "excess" had an agenda to make the US look back. I don't buy that number for one instance. We were methodical and calculated about most strikes, even waved some planes off of legitimate targets and told the Marines they are on their own as civilians were too close. You have to remember the times this was fought in. Democrats went after Bush with every kind of political ploy they could, even going so far as to believe every story coming out even if it was obviously made up.
As for what happened to them, who knows: Let me speculate a bit based what I already know to be true facts. They were buried in Eastern Syria.
Remember this:
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/6/4/opcw-suspects-17-instances-of-chemical-weapons-use-in-syria
Why was it that the gas attacks were not as effective as they could have been. It's because the gas that was used had been weakened over time and dug up during the Syrian conflict. When dropped on populations they didn't have the effect of a full-strength gas attack as the chemical will degrade over time. During and right before the war multiple convoys of trucks were seen going into Syria.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/us...n-in-gold-in-iraq/F3FAD42RH7SPAGKNEO7QKGGGIQ/
The article above was a captured truck with gold bars. Read where they captured the truck. It was reported that multiple convoys left Baghdad into Syria, and no one knew what was in them. Some of it was Iraqi cash.
The New York Times reported this in 2014. Notice the weapons were destroyed and reported in 2008. An election year.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...t/us-casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html
Bush Lied and People Died was lie and very good one. Shocker
It will, of that I am certain, but they will think twice about it and will prevent many of the same types of attacks from occurring. Do the opposite, and you will get many more. I want to minimize that as much as possible.
The difference between Hamas and Israel is that Hamas started the war. Once started, war is the worst thing possible, and once entered into makes the things that you describe happen. Is that Israel's fault? No, they didn't start the war Hamas did, Israel is just finishing it. There was peace on that border before Hamas attacked regardless of circumstance. Hamas chose war for their people. They are getting what they asked for, and their people have nothing but Hamas to blame for what they are enduring in a war. That is what war is.
The impression I get from you is that you do not understand the nature of what war is. You seem confused about how wars should be fought. If you understand that a war means there are no rules, then once started both sides will have no rules. Israel has not unleashed the full force of their power. If there are no rules then Israel gave itself those rules and have differentiated themselves from Hamas based on that. Hamas on the other hand has declared a war of no restrictions when they deliberately raped and murdered civilians. It's not that hard to see for me.
I just don't get why it's so hard for some to understand this. 👍
Please be so kind as to explain to me the date and location and action in which Hamas started the war.
7 Oct 2023. I know you are going to say the war started years ago. The Palestinians had negotiated and won a peace with Israel prior to this. On this day without a doubt Hamas declared war. No ambiguity.
Yeah, I put the start of the war at 1948. I’m surprised you think the history of the conflict started on Oct 7. But upon reflection I guess I shouldn’t be surprised. It explains perfectly why you think Israel’s mass slaughter is justified
Are you familiar with the Great March of Return? Took place in 2018 I think. Considering the cowardly actions of the IDF against unarmed civilians I wonder if you would say Gaza had the right to do to Israel what Israel is doing to Gaza if only they had the military power to do it?. Is your opinion/acceptance/justification of the genocide being conducted by Israel based on principle, or is it based on you’ve picked a side and you’re okay with your side committing genocide after a savage and brutal and cowardly attack by Hamas, but Gaza has no corresponding right to commit genocide (or at least ethnic cleansing) after an equally savage and brutal and cowardly attack on it by the IDF?
It’s late and I’m going to bed. I’ll check on your answer tomorrow.
No I agree that the conflict goes back to the creation of Israel. Your question was specific to this war. War designates the start of the fighting. If there is peace there is no war. So the current war started in 2023. Its just the next war in a series of wars.
Forgot your second part.
Yes, I am familiar with the "mostly" peaceful protest. Sounds oddly reminicent of something. It also occurred while the US Embassy was being moved to Jerusalem. The reports from special interest groups don't move me much. At least one claim of a doctor being killed deliberately by an Israeli is unrealistic. To make that shot a soldier would have had to make a shot more than a mile away. A feat that is possible but only with luck and perfect conditions. Most of the negative to Israel reports have come from organizations that have taken a lot politicaly motivated liberty in the past.
This brings trust issues. I know what I saw in videos posted did not back up thier claims. So I don't trust the reporting.
As for your next part. That question is loaded with assumptions that I do not agree with. I do not believe Israel is commiting genocide. The war would stop tomorrow if Hamas surrenders. Being that I don't think Israel is committing genocide I cannot answer your question. Try rephrasing and leave the genocide out.
