Road to the White House 2016

[Ineth]

Mexico [...] can't even begin to deal with their own huge criminality problem

 

...which is in no small part caused by the US war on drugs.

[Ineth]

The Surprisingly Strong Progressive Case For Donald Trump

 

Made me chuckle.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/hillary-clinton-tells-israeli-billionaire-and-mega-donor-she-will-support-israel

 

Hillary promising to white knight for Israel.

[HoonDing]

[Namutree]

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/hillary-clinton-tells-israeli-billionaire-and-mega-donor-she-will-support-israel

 

Hillary promising to white knight for Israel.

Not much of a surprise really. I don't see why she even bothered writing a letter about it. It's not like her pro-Israel stance is some kinda mystery.

Edited July 26, 2015 by Namutree

[Ineth]

 

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/hillary-clinton-tells-israeli-billionaire-and-mega-donor-she-will-support-israel

 

Hillary promising to white knight for Israel.

Not much of a surprise really. I don't see why she even bothered writing a letter about it. It's not like her pro-Israel stance is some kinda mystery.

 

 

It's one of the few topics where I agree with her. Why do you guys have a problem with it?

 

It shouldn't be controversial when a politician is in favour of continuing to support a close ally, and condemns the racist "BDS" hate movement directed against its citizens.

Edited July 26, 2015 by Ineth

[Namutree]

 

 

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/hillary-clinton-tells-israeli-billionaire-and-mega-donor-she-will-support-israel

 

Hillary promising to white knight for Israel.

Not much of a surprise really. I don't see why she even bothered writing a letter about it. It's not like her pro-Israel stance is some kinda mystery.

 

 

It's one of the few topics where I agree with her. Why do you guys have a problem with it?

 

 

I don't have a problem with Israel myself (don't know nearly enough about the Israeli-Palestinian situation to have an opinion on it).

[Elerond]

 

 

 

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/hillary-clinton-tells-israeli-billionaire-and-mega-donor-she-will-support-israel

 

Hillary promising to white knight for Israel.

Not much of a surprise really. I don't see why she even bothered writing a letter about it. It's not like her pro-Israel stance is some kinda mystery.

 

 

It's one of the few topics where I agree with her. Why do you guys have a problem with it?

 

 

I don't have a problem with Israel myself (don't know nearly enough about the Israeli-Palestinian situation to have an opinion on it).

 

 

That is the problem. Currently there is just one country Israel but people treat it like there are two countries and that Palestinians are something else than full citizens of Israel, which has lead in situation where there are in arguably two countries inside one, but one of these countries don't really have any say what is going to happen for them. And when you add historic animosity between these two populations you get current cold war situation which looks like that it isn't solvable without very extreme actions that will change significantly dynamics between these two populations. 

[Meshugger]

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/hillary-clinton-tells-israeli-billionaire-and-mega-donor-she-will-support-israel

 

Hillary promising to white knight for Israel.

 

To no one's surprise.

[Wrath of Dagon]

 

Mexico [...] can't even begin to deal with their own huge criminality problem

 

...which is in no small part caused by the US war on drugs.

 

In no small part caused by failure to secure the border, letting the drug cartels have free reign.

[Maedhros]

From the same site: http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/20-examples-bernie-sanders-powerful-record-civil-and-human-rights-1950s

 

I like this guy.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

 

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/hillary-clinton-tells-israeli-billionaire-and-mega-donor-she-will-support-israel

Hillary promising to white knight for Israel.

 

Not much of a surprise really. I don't see why she even bothered writing a letter about it. It's not like her pro-Israel stance is some kinda mystery.

 

It's one of the few topics where I agree with her. Why do you guys have a problem with it?

 

It shouldn't be controversial when a politician is in favour of continuing to support a close ally, and condemns the racist "BDS" hate movement directed against its citizens.

Yes, greatest ally(who has never had a soldier die in a war involving America) must be protected at all costs. Never question greatest ally because they fund most politiciansmake great contributions to America.

 

 

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/hillary-clinton-tells-israeli-billionaire-and-mega-donor-she-will-support-israel

Hillary promising to white knight for Israel.

 

 

To no one's surprise.

Well at least we can't be racist against jews anymore because racism = prejudice + power.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Yes, greatest ally(who has never had a soldier die in a war involving America) must be protected at all costs. Never question greatest ally because they fund most politiciansmake great contributions to America.

Israel cooperates with US plenty covertly. And sometimes it's what you don't do, like Israel never reacted when Iraq was firing Scud missiles at it one after another during the first Iraq war, because US asked it not to so as not to disrupt the Arab coalition we assembled.

[Agiel]

...and recruits spies in our intelligence apparatus (who not only sold intel to the Lekem, but to anyone else who would buy i.e. Pakistan and Apartheid South Africa. Oh, and by the way is almost out of the clink),nearly sinks one of our own ELINT vessels in international waters, and pressured the US to divert precious air assets to the Scud hunt in Desert Storm that General Horner believed was better spent to decisively decimating Iraq's military to the point that the Baathist regime of Hussein would be another footnote in history.

Edited July 27, 2015 by Agiel

[Orogun01]

 

 

 

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/hillary-clinton-tells-israeli-billionaire-and-mega-donor-she-will-support-israel

 

Hillary promising to white knight for Israel.

Not much of a surprise really. I don't see why she even bothered writing a letter about it. It's not like her pro-Israel stance is some kinda mystery.

 

 

It's one of the few topics where I agree with her. Why do you guys have a problem with it?

 

 

I don't have a problem with Israel myself (don't know nearly enough about the Israeli-Palestinian situation to have an opinion on it).

 

I guess it doesn't bother you to send millions of your tax dollars to support a vicious nation that attacks both its allies and enemies and seems to have no qualms about committing genocide. Plus there is the whole Samson Option thing and how the freaking insane the Israeli hardliners are; If you don't know they talk about nuking even their allies as retaliation for genocide against them. I really don't want to support that nation.

[Namutree]

 

I don't have a problem with Israel myself (don't know nearly enough about the Israeli-Palestinian situation to have an opinion on it).

 

 

 

 

 

I guess it doesn't bother you to send millions of your tax dollars to support a vicious nation that attacks both its allies and enemies and seems to have no qualms about committing genocide. 

 

I oppose foreign aid and having allies in general. Trade with all nations, alliances with none; that's my policy. It bothers me to see US tax dollars going to support any state. I don't have any issues with Israel itself as I don't know much about it. 

 

BTW: Defining it as a "vicious nation" doesn't do much to make me think your evaluation of Israel is accurate though.

[Ineth]

Yes, greatest ally(who has never had a soldier die in a war involving America) must be protected at all costs. Never question greatest ally because they fund most politiciansmake great contributions to America.

 

What's with the spitefulness Kaine, it's not like you.

 

As for fighting side-by-side with the US in a war, that's both a weird criteria to apply in and of itself, and also kinda unfair to apply to a country that didn't exist yet at the time of WW2 and was only 2 years old (recovering from its own war of independence and still poor and barely functioning itself) at the time of the Korean war. (Nonetheless, it did support the South Korean side both diplomatically and with humanitarian aid.)

 

Regarding the Gulf War, as Wrath already mentioned, Israel stayed out of it at the request of the US.

 

As for the remaining wars, the only countries that fought side-by-side with the US even though the war in question didn't directly concern themselves, were the UK and Australia I think. Not surprisingly those are also seen as the closest allies. But that doesn't mean that they should be considered the only allies.

 

I guess it doesn't bother you to send millions of your tax dollars to support a vicious nation that attacks both its allies and enemies and seems to have no qualms about committing genocide.

 

"vicious nation"  You should use more strongly biased hyperbole, that would really bolster your argument. /s

 

"attacks"  Israel's military campaigns were all defensive reactions to prior aggressions directed against it. It has no interest in conquering anyone, only in protecting its own citizens - proven by the fact that it made peace with any neighbor willing to do so (Egypt, Jordan) and had no qualms about returning territories (Sinai) to those countries which it only needed to capture in order to have a safety zone around its populated areas while said countries were still hostile. Israel routinely faces threats to its very existence like no other country in the world, so it's no surprise it has to do things which other countries don't. Judging countries' actions according to fair and moral criteria includes taking into account the different circumstance. Demanding that Israel must be no more violent than, say, a country like the Netherlands which is surrounded by peaceful allies, is a double standard.

 

"genocide"  Which genocide would that be? The Palestinians, who thanks to UN/EU and Israeli aid are growing faster, and have better nutrition and healthcare, than most Arab populations? If that's a genocide, it's got to be the most incompetently executed one in history.

Edited July 27, 2015 by Ineth

[Elerond]

"attacks"  Israel's military campaigns were all defensive reactions to prior aggressions directed against it.

 

"genocide"  Which genocide would that be? The Palestinians, who thanks to UN/EU and Israeli aid are growing faster, and have better nutrition and healthcare, than most Arab populations? If that's a genocide, it's got to be the most incompetently executed one in history.

Military campaigns against its own citizens.

 

Isolating its own citizens to areas that are walled off from rest of country, because they belong in minority and discriminatingly bombing said citizen because they live and move in areas where they (Israel's government) say criminals(terrorists) have said to keep their strongholds. Actively denying full rights of their citizens because they belong in minority that follow different religion than majority of the population. Denying right to vote from their citizens, because they belong in minority.

[Zoraptor]

Genocide ain't even slightly correct. I don't like Israel much at all, but hyperbole is hyperbole, and that is pretty hyperbolic hyperbole.

 

The Bantustan accusation is far more accurate than genocide, there's certainly no organised attempt at exterminating an ethno-religious group from Israel.

[Ineth]

Military campaigns against its own citizens.

 

Nonsense, the Palestinians living in West Bank / Gaza / Lebanon are not Israeli citizens, and simply stamping your foot and declaring them so because it fits your argument is a pretty childish thing to do.

 

Gaza is a quasi-country ruled by Hamas.

 

In the West Bank the territorial situation is more complicated, but that doesn't make it a single political entity. It's two entities (Israel and the Palestinian Authority) who have agreed on an interim arrangement (Oslo II Accord) which divided the territory into 3 administrative zones: Area A fully governed by the PA; Area B jointly governed by both sides; and Area C fully under Israeli control. The Oslo treaties also specified that this arrangement would be merely temporary, and that future negotiations should draw proper borders to allow the PA to become a proper country.

 

The Palestinian refugees living in Lebanon, are subject to Lebanese law of course.

[Elerond]

 

Military campaigns against its own citizens.

 

Nonsense, the Palestinians living in West Bank / Gaza / Lebanon are not Israeli citizens, and simply stamping your foot and declaring them so because it fits your argument is a pretty childish thing to do.

 

As long as Israel and most of world's other countries says that those areas where they live belongs in Israel, they are citizens of Israel regardless what government of Israel and other claim.

[Ineth]

As long as Israel and most of world's other countries says that those areas where they live belongs in Israel

 

They don't say that though.

 

Israel makes no claims at all on Gazan or Lebanese territory, and the only part of the West Bank that it considers Israeli territory is East Jerusalem.

 

The rest of the West Bank is considered "disputed territory" by Israel; subject to the interim administration agreement I mentioned above, but not actually part of any country yet, and will only become so through proper peace negotiations.

 

And the "world's other countries" sure aren't pushing Israel to consider those areas part of its territory, either.

 

[Rostere]

 

As long as Israel and most of world's other countries says that those areas where they live belongs in Israel

 

They don't say that though.

 

Israel makes no claims at all on Gazan or Lebanese territory, and the only part of the West Bank that it considers Israeli territory is East Jerusalem.

 

The rest of the West Bank is considered "disputed territory" by Israel; subject to the interim administration agreement I mentioned above, but not actually part of any country yet, and will only become so through proper peace negotiations.

 

And the "world's other countries" sure aren't pushing Israel to consider those areas part of its territory, either.

 

Israel considers the Gazan waters and Gazan airspace parts of Israel, because they police those as if it was such. Either that, or Gaza has been under constant Israeli military occupation.

 

We are not talking about Lebanon right now, we are talking about Gaza (which evidently does not have sovereign access to its own fishing waters, nor its entire territory, nor its own airspace), we are talking about the occupied Golan Heights, and we are talking about the West Bank. You are completely wrong when you say that East Jerusalem is the only part of the West Bank that Israel considers part of its own territory. Depending on race, you are either judged by Israeli law (if you are an Israeli) or by Israeli military courts if you committed you crime outside area C.

 

You might say that Area C is the only part Israel does not necessarily consider part of itself. If you live in Area A or B, you are in Israel in every thinkable way, except for if you belong to the wrong race - then you can't vote, and if you are accused of any crime, you are prosecuted by a military court (which is a complete farce). Muslims and Christians living outside Area C have been subjected to a continuous process of ethnic cleansing, as part of an effort by the government to "Judaize" the region (see current examples here and here).

 

Now, obviously this is nothing compared to countries like North Korea. But you have to make truly absurd arguments as a democracy in order to consider a country like this your "greatest ally". There is no question about Israel's 1948 ethnic cleansing and the current occupation of the West Bank being worse than Apartheid South Africa, for example (which was for a very long time also considered a "great ally"). Suddenly it became un-cool to hate blacks, and that's when people turned on Apartheid South Africa. Sooner or later it will become un-cool to hate Arabs, and then the exact same will happen to Israel.

[Ineth]

Israel considers the Gazan waters and Gazan airspace parts of Israel, because they police those as if it was such. Either that, or Gaza has been under constant Israeli military occupation.

 

No, not an occupation.

A blockade -- in accordance with international maritime law, and with the legitimate purpose of curbing weapon shipments to Hamas from their allies in Syria and Iran.

 

Depending on race [...]

if you belong to the wrong race - then you can't vote [...]

Muslims and Christians living outside Area C have been subjected to [...]

 

Stop that slander already.

 

The Israeli justice system makes no distinction on the basis of race, neither in Israel itself nor in the West Bank.

The only distinction it makes, is between citizens vs non-citizens - like every other country in the world does too.

 

20% of Israeli citizens are Arabs; they enjoy full legal equality with Jewish and other citizens.

 

West Bank Palestinians who are not Israeli citizens, obviously don't get to enter Israel whenever they want or vote in Israeli elections - again, same as with every other country in the world. They have their own government (the Palestinian Authority), which fully governs them in area A and in civil matters in area B and some civil matters in area C - and the fact that this government of theirs has stopped holding elections, is not Israel's fault or something that Israel can do anything about. Pretty sleazy then, to demonize Israel for they fact that they don't have the right to vote.

 

as part of an effort by the government to "Judaize" the region (see current examples here and here).

 

More hyperbole.

 

Yes, an interim shared/divided administration of a disputed territory, is complicated and messy.

 

But as your linked scare story examples show, the Israeli democracy is equipped to handle that mess better than most would. The military may be stubborn and unreasonable sometimes, but Israeli civil servants (like in the first link) and judges do rule in favor of Palestinians whose legally owned land and property is being infringed on in Israeli-controlled areas.

 

Obviously, the best thing would be for that messy "shared administration of disputed territory" status to end, and proper borders drawn so that Israel and PA will each have a clearly-defined territory where they have full authority, as peaceful neighbors.

 

But the PA has, for decades now, stubbornly boycotted the peace negotiations which could bring about this result, and instead regularly repeated its oath to its people that it will accept no compromise and will continue to fight until Israel is annihilated, all the Jews murdered or deported, and a Judenrein "Grand Palestine" established on the whole territory of the British Mandate for Palestine minus Jordan.

 

And so, the ****ty situation of the West Bank continues.

 

There is no question about Israel's 1948 ethnic cleansing

 

If you truly believe that then boy, you've swallowed the Antizionist narrative deeply.

Edited July 27, 2015 by Ineth

[Meshugger]

Israel only answers to superior power and each and everyone of you know it. All this "aww, they've so horrible!"-hoopla does nothing.