Donnelly was echoed by Jonah Goldberg of National Review: “The United States needs to go to war with Iraq because it needs to go to war with someone in the region and Iraq makes the most sense.”

Goldberg endorsed “the Ledeen Doctrine” of ex-Pentagon official Michael Ledeen, which Goldberg described thus: “Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show we mean business.” (When the French ambassador in London, at a dinner party, asked why we should risk World War III over some “shitty little country”—meaning Israel—Goldberg’s magazine was not amused.)

His daughter only screwed up with the CPA, she didn’t see the inside of an Abrams tank, only the Emerald city.

I’ll admit to spewing platitudes from time to time, but Holly really takes the crown.

Does she realize that within Israel’s borders 3 million people live without many basic human rights or the right to vote?

My problem with Israel is the settlers and their disproportionate influence on Israeli governments. There cannot be a peaceful solution other than a two state solution. The entire goal of the settlements is to make that impossible. The overwhelming majority of settlements will have to be abandoned if there is to be a viable Palestinian state on the West Bank. I do not see any real movement in Israel to do this and I therefore question how much commitment to a lasting and just peace exists.

Jason – You are correct. I went over dozens of your postings and comments and I was wrong about your attitude. My sincere apologies.

My post zionist beliefs are not as radical as some. I do not favor the kind of secular vision that some in my camp do. I believe in a Jewish homeland. However, I do not agree with my settler relatives on either the desirablity or the religious imperative to annex Judea and Samaria and other lands of Eretz Israel. Until Israel grapples with truely coming to terms with it’s proper dimensions the dreams of zionists may never last.

Rather than calling others ignorant, stupid, or anti-Semitic you should look at your own position and consider whether you are blinded by your own beliefs and ignorant to the validity of the positions of other peoples.

1) Ignorance
2) Stupidity
3) Anti-Semitism

I prefer to give most of you the benefit of the doubt and therefore suggest that you please go educate yourselves.

Israel is not perfect and makes many mistakes but it is far superior to any surrounding country or Arab organization.

I have referred specifically to terrorists, not to Muslims. Please be more correct (or should I insist, more honest?).

Using terms like vermin to describe muslims sure seems like visceral animosity to me.

Well, jd, since I never used that word to describe anyone, I guess you were wrong to include me among those that you describe as having a “visceral animosity toward all muslims”. I think it would be helpful if you were careful in responding only to people who have actually said the things you want to respond to.

I think it says more about you all that you all would actually think that I would advocate literally starving people to death than anything else

.

Didn’t anybody read Scale’s writeups? (noooooo) It’s simply a real-world example of what might be conceived by naive idealists someday for UN peace-keeping and “defusing” (as well as, I had thought before the Iraq war began, what might be done in Iraq, or in this case, a better-capable Arab League):

“Instead of a conducting a direct assault and massive strike, coalition forces would establish a loose cordon around the city and establish control of the surrounding countryside. The cordon would eventually result in a complete isolation of the city from the outside world. All avenues to include air, sea and land arteries would be blocked. Moreover, the coalition would seek to control sources of food, power, water, and sanitation services. Any vital natural resources would be controlled. Finally, using technological means, all internal information sources, commercial, financial, and governmental nodes would be suppressed and only information emanating from the coalition would reach the city’s population. Throughout the cordon operation, coalition forces would demonstrate their absolute
mastery of the situation.”

“Let the City Collapse on Itself. As the coalition achieves control of the surrounding countryside, it will most likely collect resources to support the establishment of sanctuaries or safe havens around the city. Humanitarian organizations, both governmental and non-governmental will be encouraged to construct protected camps. The population within the city would be encouraged to leave and coalition forces would freely allow refugees passage through the
cordon to the relative security and safety of the camps.

For those who stay, the isolation of the city will in time create a refugee problem for the enemy. With the ever increasing depletion of resources, the remaining population will eventually see the government as an impotent entity that is incapable of providing basic services or providing for the welfare and security of the people. Inevitably, the
military forces and their leaders will be seen, particularly among the dispossessed within the city, as the real enemy.”

“Now, in order to defeat an urban enemy, even if time is on our side, we have to gain control of the urban mass. How do we do that? Well we do it like we did it in Vietnam, many times successfully: through the use of a cordon operation. A cordon operation is exactly what the name implies. It is a loose way to control the activities of the city from outside the immediate confines of the dense urban mass. We have the technology at our command, thanks to the information age, that allows us to do that today if we choose to. Control the city from
outside; establish a loose cordon; take your time; find the vulnerable points; and destroy them systematically in a discreet, surgical form of
direct action. The idea of pouring divisions into an urban mass to me is not wise. And the idea of carpet bombing is equally inappropriate. Remember that the decisive ingredient in urban warfare is the people. If we empty a city of its population, then all that remains is a militarily irrelevant urban shell.

Once we’ve established the cordon, and gained control of the urban masses, we’ve won. The war is over. We own the countryside. The enemy has no initiative. We’ve contained the enemy in the city. We
can only lose by becoming impatient again; we don’t want to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. It seems to me that those urban takedowns that have been successful in the past—the Siege of Paris
in 1870 comes to mind—have been the types of operations in which the army first gains the initiative; second, controls the countryside; third, contains the urban environment; fourth, reverses the relative advantage of time; and finally, allows the city to collapse on itself.”

This all brings me back to my grandfathers stories about life in the Irgun. The British considered them terrorists to be shot on sight. The Irgun planted bombs in arab markets killing soldier and civiian alike. My Grandfather left Israel for the US in February,1947 primarily because of his revulsion over the Irgun’s bombing of the King David Hotel and the killing of 90 people.

What goes around comes around.

I know my comments are often inflammatory

The odds are very high that you’ll outgrow your current phase eventually. We just need patience.

When DLS calls other human beings “vermin” that is as close to Nazi language as you can get.

No, it isn’t. It’s an accurate metaphor to describe what amounts to a deliberately chosen criminal human pestilence.

But we know that the people in Gaza are not all Hamas members under arms don’t we?

The innocent — unarmed — people are allowed to leave. There’s currently a problem because everyone (wrongly) expects Israel to handle all the refugees, which would overwhelm Israel, but the idea is sound enough. So is what else is being sought, bringing in food and medicine (ideally kept out of the hands of HAMAS).

I certainly didn’t call DLS a Nazi or compare him to one. I simply compared Gaza to a concentration camp (or collection camp, or canton, or bantustan if you like).

I understand. And the terrorists we have in Guantanamo have it too good; were Russia better it would bring back and let us use Kolyma. Heh, heh.

My, my, what misuse of words. Destroying HAMAS is not genocide, and neither that nor blockading or besieging Gaza to force surrender of HAMAS are insane.

In a democracy, having a personal connection to an issue has never been a prerequisite for being allowed to have or express an opinion about it.

Also, I have no “visceral animosity toward all muslims”. You just plain made that up.

Among Americans it seems like Israel raises more emotion than even our war in Iraq. Why? I know why it does for me, I have skin in the game with relatives in Israel and a grandfather who was a member of the Irgun from 1944 to 1947 and a part of the establishment of Israel. But why MVDG or Jason or any of the commentators here? What is your connection to Israel and why the visceral animosity toward all muslims? I’m curious.

Michael van der Galien said,

Steve: I am not answering your comment because it is about a subject I said was closed. Done. Feel free to disagree, but it is what it is.

That’s just fine with me Moe, I was just adding my 2¢ to the discussion.

A reply from you wasn’t necessary but I appreciate it… It’s a good example of what I’m talking about.