The Biden's Israel bashing thread
“For you [Israel] are a people holy to the Lord your God. The Lord your God has chosen you out of all the peoples on the face of the earth to be his people, his treasured possession” (Deuteronomy 7:6).
I love your ability to express yourself so eloquently, MS.
I love your ability to express yourself so eloquently, MS.
MidnightSonneteer said:Lol... you say that as I struggle to figure out how the quote boxes work:)
And I am come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up out of that land unto a good land and a large, unto a land flowing with milk and honey; unto the place of the Canaanites, and the Hittites, and the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites ( Exodus 3:8 ).
And I have said, I will bring you up out of the affliction of Egypt unto the land of the Canaanites, and the Hittites, and the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, unto a land flowing with milk and honey ( Exodus 3:10 ).
What do you think happened to the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites, and the Jebusites ( known also as the seven nations of Canaan) when the Hebrews arrived?
And when [ God ] had destroyed seven nations in the land of Canaan, He distributed [ the children of Israel's ] land to them by allotment ( Acts 13:19 ).
Therefore, the land, according to the Jewish Tanakh and the Christian Old Testament is consecrated "Holy Land" by God himself. And since the Jewish God is also the Christian God ( Jesus being his Son ), then Christians are bound to support Israel and defend the Holy Land.
But yeah, I am sure oil has something to do with it too.
Just click the little quote box to the far right under the person you want to quote.
And I am come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up out of that land unto a good land and a large, unto a land flowing with milk and honey; unto the place of the Canaanites, and the Hittites, and the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites ( Exodus 3:8 ).
And I have said, I will bring you up out of the affliction of Egypt unto the land of the Canaanites, and the Hittites, and the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, unto a land flowing with milk and honey ( Exodus 3:10 ).
What do you think happened to the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites, and the Jebusites ( known also as the seven nations of Canaan) when the Hebrews arrived?
And when [ God ] had destroyed seven nations in the land of Canaan, He distributed [ the children of Israel's ] land to them by allotment ( Acts 13:19 ).
Therefore, the land, according to the Jewish Tanakh and the Christian Old Testament is consecrated "Holy Land" by God himself. And since the Jewish God is also the Christian God ( Jesus being his Son ), then Christians are bound to support Israel and defend the Holy Land.
But yeah, I am sure oil has something to do with it too.
Just click the little quote box to the far right under the person you want to quote.
MidnightSonneteer said:Here are the thoughts I posted on the matter back on the first of the month, for anyone who hasn't seen them, and will only add that as I watch the CBS evening news coverage of the conflict it is always tagged..."War in The Holy Land"...which I wish they would not do since...
A. Massacres aren't quite the same as wars, per se.
B. Is a land really Holy if it's always a violent place.
Excogitations....
.....
.....
Thank you for putting your 'excogitations' so well, MS - my thoughts entirely.
Josh
A. Massacres aren't quite the same as wars, per se.
B. Is a land really Holy if it's always a violent place.
Excogitations....
.....
.....
Thank you for putting your 'excogitations' so well, MS - my thoughts entirely.
Josh
MidnightSonneteer said:Translated as "God's chosen" lends the phrase a "master race" vibe, and I can't imagine that similarity being lost on anyone with even a modest awareness of the Holocaust.
I always get a bit agitated when I read a reference to "the Holocaust", as if it was the only one, and exclusively a Jewish tragedy. There have been over 50 official Holocausts, involving the death of many many millions of people all over the world. The 1930s/40s 2nd World War Holocaust in Germany/Poland was just one of them, albeit as unacceptable as any other.
So it is also intriguing to know how and why the word 'holocaust' has been appropriated as only a Jewish thing ... and likewise I am also curious to know why the word 'anti-semitic' is automatically associated as 'anti-Jewish', especially at the current time given that the Palestinians are a Semitic people, as are many other Arabs in other countries in the Middle East. (This is just an observation, not a blame thing).
I always get a bit agitated when I read a reference to "the Holocaust", as if it was the only one, and exclusively a Jewish tragedy. There have been over 50 official Holocausts, involving the death of many many millions of people all over the world. The 1930s/40s 2nd World War Holocaust in Germany/Poland was just one of them, albeit as unacceptable as any other.
So it is also intriguing to know how and why the word 'holocaust' has been appropriated as only a Jewish thing ... and likewise I am also curious to know why the word 'anti-semitic' is automatically associated as 'anti-Jewish', especially at the current time given that the Palestinians are a Semitic people, as are many other Arabs in other countries in the Middle East. (This is just an observation, not a blame thing).
Josh said:
I always get a bit agitated when I read a reference to "the Holocaust", as if it was the only one, and exclusively a Jewish tragedy. There have been over 50 official Holocausts, involving the death of many many millions of people all over the world. The 1930s/40s 2nd World War Holocaust in Germany/Poland was just one of them, albeit as unacceptable as any other.
So it is also intriguing to know how and why the word 'holocaust' has been appropriated as only a Jewish thing ... and likewise I am also curious to know why the word 'anti-semitic' is automatically associated as 'anti-Jewish', especially at the current time given that the Palestinians are a Semitic people, as are many other Arabs in other countries in the Middle East. (This is just an observation, not a blame thing).
Voltaire once wrote "To find out who rules over you, simply find out whom you are not to criticize."
I always get a bit agitated when I read a reference to "the Holocaust", as if it was the only one, and exclusively a Jewish tragedy. There have been over 50 official Holocausts, involving the death of many many millions of people all over the world. The 1930s/40s 2nd World War Holocaust in Germany/Poland was just one of them, albeit as unacceptable as any other.
So it is also intriguing to know how and why the word 'holocaust' has been appropriated as only a Jewish thing ... and likewise I am also curious to know why the word 'anti-semitic' is automatically associated as 'anti-Jewish', especially at the current time given that the Palestinians are a Semitic people, as are many other Arabs in other countries in the Middle East. (This is just an observation, not a blame thing).
Voltaire once wrote "To find out who rules over you, simply find out whom you are not to criticize."
Josh said:
I always get a bit agitated when I read a reference to "the Holocaust", as if it was the only one, and exclusively a Jewish tragedy. There have been over 50 official Holocausts, involving the death of many many millions of people all over the world. The 1930s/40s 2nd World War Holocaust in Germany/Poland was just one of them, albeit as unacceptable as any other.
So it is also intriguing to know how and why the word 'holocaust' has been appropriated as only a Jewish thing ... and likewise I am also curious to know why the word 'anti-semitic' is automatically associated as 'anti-Jewish', especially at the current time given that the Palestinians are a Semitic people, as are many other Arabs in other countries in the Middle East. (This is just an observation, not a blame thing).
Not all Jewish believe the word holocaust is inclusive of them.
https://jewishjournal.com/mobile_20111212/117824/hitlers-inspiration-and-guide-the-native-american-holocaust/
Excerpt:
We don’t talk about the correlation as much as we should between the Native American Holocaust and the Jewish Holocaust. I often hear people dismiss the correlation between the suffering of our people and that of others. They felt that there is no comparison between the magnitude of horror and death that happened during the Jewish holocaust. I am by no means saying that the Jewish Holocaust was not one of humanity’s darkest hours, but I believe that we must put down our measuring stick of who had it worse.
I always get a bit agitated when I read a reference to "the Holocaust", as if it was the only one, and exclusively a Jewish tragedy. There have been over 50 official Holocausts, involving the death of many many millions of people all over the world. The 1930s/40s 2nd World War Holocaust in Germany/Poland was just one of them, albeit as unacceptable as any other.
So it is also intriguing to know how and why the word 'holocaust' has been appropriated as only a Jewish thing ... and likewise I am also curious to know why the word 'anti-semitic' is automatically associated as 'anti-Jewish', especially at the current time given that the Palestinians are a Semitic people, as are many other Arabs in other countries in the Middle East. (This is just an observation, not a blame thing).
Not all Jewish believe the word holocaust is inclusive of them.
https://jewishjournal.com/mobile_20111212/117824/hitlers-inspiration-and-guide-the-native-american-holocaust/
Excerpt:
We don’t talk about the correlation as much as we should between the Native American Holocaust and the Jewish Holocaust. I often hear people dismiss the correlation between the suffering of our people and that of others. They felt that there is no comparison between the magnitude of horror and death that happened during the Jewish holocaust. I am by no means saying that the Jewish Holocaust was not one of humanity’s darkest hours, but I believe that we must put down our measuring stick of who had it worse.
Josh said:Any potential president of the USA will always gush out the words "I'm a friend of Israel' (else they have no hope of getting into office). I'm intrigued as to why?
Why does a little country, less than 100 years old, have such power over big countries like America, and most Western countries too whose prime-ministers fall over themselves not to 'upset' Israel by calling a spade a spade. And though a signficant factor, it probably runs much deeper than Big Oil.
In answer to your question above regarding the 'Why' of the USA's unfailing support of Israel, Josh, I would reply 'strategic interests', of which oil, as you agree, is undoubtedly a major factor, in addition to the geopolitical ones. I'm sure a little research on your part would enable you to determine exactly the nature of those 'strategic interests'.
That said, my main concern is with the title of this thread. If it had been called 'The USA's' Israel-Bashing Thread', I would have had no complaints. Its present title, however, strikes me as inaccurate and, dare I say, petty.
Below is as relevant an analysis of the position as I can find. Undoubtedly, the growing influence of China in the region, especially relating to its ever-strengthening ties with Iran, adds a further layer of compexity to an already complicated situation.
That Israel is a Jewish state is unneccesary to the present discussion and, for obvious reasons, will inevitably muddy the waters.
___
It was only after the decline of the British Empire—and its exit from Palestine in 1948—that the US began to play a more fundamental role in supporting Israel.
The US was the first country to recognise Israel as a state in 1948.
This came after Israel expelled some 850,000 Palestinians in a campaign of ethnic cleansing designed to ensure they would be a minority in the new state of Israel.
But it was still another two decades before the US began to treat Israel as its most important ally in the Middle East.
While the US did offer some financial aid to Israel through the 1940s and 50s it was mostly in the form of loans. At the time the US even opposed some arms sales to Israel.
The US ruling class wanted to build links with several states in the Middle East against Russia, and Israel was just one among many. And most ordinary people in Arab countries supported the Palestinians.
The US worried that appearing too friendly to Israel would scupper its deals with Arab leaders. Israel had to prove to the US that its support was indispensable.
In 1951, after the Iranian government nationalised its oil industry, Israeli newspaper Haaretz explained the role Israel’s leaders hoped they could play.
“Strengthening Israel helps Western powers maintain stability in the Middle East. Israel is to become the watchdog,” it wrote.
“If the Western powers should sometimes prefer to close their eyes, Israel could be relied upon to punish one or several neighbouring states whose discourtesy to the West went beyond the bounds of the permissible.”
As anti-colonial struggles of the 1950s and 60s weakened Britain’s and then the US’s hold on the Middle East, Israel saw its opportunity.
In 1967 Israel provoked a war with Jordan, Egypt and Syria—whose Arab nationalist governments threatened the US’s interests and were allied to Russia.
It defeated them all. This not only began Israel’s occupation of the West Bank, east Jerusalem, the Gaza Strip and the Syrian Golan Heights. It also proved that Israel could use its militarily strength in the Middle East on the US’s behalf.
In return the US poured funding into Israel so it could build up its military.
US funding for Israel skyrocketed after this. During the 1960s, US military loans to Israel averaged £17 million a year. Between 1970 and 1974, that rose to £345 million.
In return, Israel has continued to serve the US in this way ever since. The US itself is explicit about this.
In 2008 its congress passed a law to ensure that Israel keeps a “qualitative military edge” over all other states in the Middle East. To make sure Israel’s military is the most powerful in other words.
That’s because Israel is, in the words of a US congress briefing, “a vital partner in the region.”
It adds, “US aid packages for Israel have reflected this calculation.”
In fact, the US has given at least £95 billion worth of aid to Israel—and this is increasingly in the form of military aid.
Israel’s economy is entirely dependent on this. Its own arms and tech industries, central to its economy, developed out of this.
Its protection of the US’s “strategic interests” has meant the US has had an important part in crushing Palestinian revolts.
Source:
https://socialistworker.co.uk/features/why-the-us-backs-israel/
Useful Link:
https://www.aljazeera.com
Why does a little country, less than 100 years old, have such power over big countries like America, and most Western countries too whose prime-ministers fall over themselves not to 'upset' Israel by calling a spade a spade. And though a signficant factor, it probably runs much deeper than Big Oil.
In answer to your question above regarding the 'Why' of the USA's unfailing support of Israel, Josh, I would reply 'strategic interests', of which oil, as you agree, is undoubtedly a major factor, in addition to the geopolitical ones. I'm sure a little research on your part would enable you to determine exactly the nature of those 'strategic interests'.
That said, my main concern is with the title of this thread. If it had been called 'The USA's' Israel-Bashing Thread', I would have had no complaints. Its present title, however, strikes me as inaccurate and, dare I say, petty.
Below is as relevant an analysis of the position as I can find. Undoubtedly, the growing influence of China in the region, especially relating to its ever-strengthening ties with Iran, adds a further layer of compexity to an already complicated situation.
That Israel is a Jewish state is unneccesary to the present discussion and, for obvious reasons, will inevitably muddy the waters.
___
It was only after the decline of the British Empire—and its exit from Palestine in 1948—that the US began to play a more fundamental role in supporting Israel.
The US was the first country to recognise Israel as a state in 1948.
This came after Israel expelled some 850,000 Palestinians in a campaign of ethnic cleansing designed to ensure they would be a minority in the new state of Israel.
But it was still another two decades before the US began to treat Israel as its most important ally in the Middle East.
While the US did offer some financial aid to Israel through the 1940s and 50s it was mostly in the form of loans. At the time the US even opposed some arms sales to Israel.
The US ruling class wanted to build links with several states in the Middle East against Russia, and Israel was just one among many. And most ordinary people in Arab countries supported the Palestinians.
The US worried that appearing too friendly to Israel would scupper its deals with Arab leaders. Israel had to prove to the US that its support was indispensable.
In 1951, after the Iranian government nationalised its oil industry, Israeli newspaper Haaretz explained the role Israel’s leaders hoped they could play.
“Strengthening Israel helps Western powers maintain stability in the Middle East. Israel is to become the watchdog,” it wrote.
“If the Western powers should sometimes prefer to close their eyes, Israel could be relied upon to punish one or several neighbouring states whose discourtesy to the West went beyond the bounds of the permissible.”
As anti-colonial struggles of the 1950s and 60s weakened Britain’s and then the US’s hold on the Middle East, Israel saw its opportunity.
In 1967 Israel provoked a war with Jordan, Egypt and Syria—whose Arab nationalist governments threatened the US’s interests and were allied to Russia.
It defeated them all. This not only began Israel’s occupation of the West Bank, east Jerusalem, the Gaza Strip and the Syrian Golan Heights. It also proved that Israel could use its militarily strength in the Middle East on the US’s behalf.
In return the US poured funding into Israel so it could build up its military.
US funding for Israel skyrocketed after this. During the 1960s, US military loans to Israel averaged £17 million a year. Between 1970 and 1974, that rose to £345 million.
In return, Israel has continued to serve the US in this way ever since. The US itself is explicit about this.
In 2008 its congress passed a law to ensure that Israel keeps a “qualitative military edge” over all other states in the Middle East. To make sure Israel’s military is the most powerful in other words.
That’s because Israel is, in the words of a US congress briefing, “a vital partner in the region.”
It adds, “US aid packages for Israel have reflected this calculation.”
In fact, the US has given at least £95 billion worth of aid to Israel—and this is increasingly in the form of military aid.
Israel’s economy is entirely dependent on this. Its own arms and tech industries, central to its economy, developed out of this.
Its protection of the US’s “strategic interests” has meant the US has had an important part in crushing Palestinian revolts.
Source:
https://socialistworker.co.uk/features/why-the-us-backs-israel/
Useful Link:
https://www.aljazeera.com
ajay said:
[ . . . ]
That Israel is a Jewish state is unneccesary to the present discussion and, for obvious reasons, will inevitably muddy the waters.
[ . . . ]
I agree with everything you've said, ajay, with the exception of the above.
The purpose of this thread is to determine why the American president ( not any other country leader ), SupermanClark Kent Joe Biden, alone, isn't intervening in the genocide of Palestine ( let's call it what it what it really is ). Religion is DEEPLY rooted in the U.S. for reasons I've previously stated in this thread.
The Christian Savior was a Jew - that makes the Jewish faith very relevant in the scope of politics and any potential intervention against Israel. A litmus test would be to replace Jewish State with Arab State in regard to Israel and replace Arab State with Jewish State in regard to Palestine. The U.S. would not hesitate to intervene against the Arab state's genocide. Oil or no oil.
[ . . . ]
That Israel is a Jewish state is unneccesary to the present discussion and, for obvious reasons, will inevitably muddy the waters.
[ . . . ]
I agree with everything you've said, ajay, with the exception of the above.
The purpose of this thread is to determine why the American president ( not any other country leader ), Superman
The Christian Savior was a Jew - that makes the Jewish faith very relevant in the scope of politics and any potential intervention against Israel. A litmus test would be to replace Jewish State with Arab State in regard to Israel and replace Arab State with Jewish State in regard to Palestine. The U.S. would not hesitate to intervene against the Arab state's genocide. Oil or no oil.
Ahavati said:
And I am come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up out of that land unto a good land and a large, unto a land flowing with milk and honey; unto the place of the Canaanites, and the Hittites, and the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites ( Exodus 3:8 ).
And I have said, I will bring you up out of the affliction of Egypt unto the land of the Canaanites, and the Hittites, and the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, unto a land flowing with milk and honey ( Exodus 3:10 ).
What do you think happened to the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites, and the Jebusites ( known also as the seven nations of Canaan) when the Hebrews arrived?
And when [ God ] had destroyed seven nations in the land of Canaan, He distributed [ the children of Israel's ] land to them by allotment ( Acts 13:19 ).
Therefore, the land, according to the Jewish Tanakh and the Christian Old Testament is consecrated "Holy Land" by God himself. And since the Jewish God is also the Christian God ( Jesus being his Son ), then Christians are bound to support Israel and defend the Holy Land.
But yeah, I am sure oil has something to do with it too.
Just click the little quote box to the far right under the person you want to quote.
And I am come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up out of that land unto a good land and a large, unto a land flowing with milk and honey; unto the place of the Canaanites, and the Hittites, and the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites ( Exodus 3:8 ).
And I have said, I will bring you up out of the affliction of Egypt unto the land of the Canaanites, and the Hittites, and the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, unto a land flowing with milk and honey ( Exodus 3:10 ).
What do you think happened to the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites, and the Jebusites ( known also as the seven nations of Canaan) when the Hebrews arrived?
And when [ God ] had destroyed seven nations in the land of Canaan, He distributed [ the children of Israel's ] land to them by allotment ( Acts 13:19 ).
Therefore, the land, according to the Jewish Tanakh and the Christian Old Testament is consecrated "Holy Land" by God himself. And since the Jewish God is also the Christian God ( Jesus being his Son ), then Christians are bound to support Israel and defend the Holy Land.
But yeah, I am sure oil has something to do with it too.
Just click the little quote box to the far right under the person you want to quote.
Ahavati said:
Interesting article thank you.
The bit I highlighted whilst reading was the last sentence of what you highlighted:
"I am by no means saying that the Jewish Holocaust was not one of humanity’s darkest hours, but I believe that we must put down our measuring stick of who had it worse."
Sane words, and I hope they go far.
There are many brave Israelis (I admire their stance) who stand in solidarity with Palestinians, especially in the West Bank, and have faced violence from their own kin (settlers).
You are right about the role of religion. From yesterday's Guardian ...
(https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/nov/18/these-are-biblical-lands-promised-to-us-jewish-settlers-in-west-bank-hope-gaza-conflict-will-help-their-cause)
... with enough settlers (over 1 million now) who have an implacable belief (ideology) that God gave them a certain piece of turf, and it is their duty is to reclaim it, I can't see a way forward to peaceful co-existence.
Extremists on both sides want 'the other / the enemy' eradicated - and extremists seem to be in charge despite the many other sensible people and brave actions of solidarity.
Interesting article thank you.
The bit I highlighted whilst reading was the last sentence of what you highlighted:
"I am by no means saying that the Jewish Holocaust was not one of humanity’s darkest hours, but I believe that we must put down our measuring stick of who had it worse."
Sane words, and I hope they go far.
There are many brave Israelis (I admire their stance) who stand in solidarity with Palestinians, especially in the West Bank, and have faced violence from their own kin (settlers).
You are right about the role of religion. From yesterday's Guardian ...
(https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/nov/18/these-are-biblical-lands-promised-to-us-jewish-settlers-in-west-bank-hope-gaza-conflict-will-help-their-cause)
... with enough settlers (over 1 million now) who have an implacable belief (ideology) that God gave them a certain piece of turf, and it is their duty is to reclaim it, I can't see a way forward to peaceful co-existence.
Extremists on both sides want 'the other / the enemy' eradicated - and extremists seem to be in charge despite the many other sensible people and brave actions of solidarity.
