AAAARRRGH

[filkertom]

Okay, listen. I've got way too much shit to do today to be distracted by this. But not only does this not fucking help....

Look at that motherfucker.

Just look at him.

That is our president.

I am humiliated by this asshole chimp. The Repubs who support him should be at least doubly so.

Comments

[pabsungenis.livejournal.com]

The problem is, he's right. And I don't use the three words "Bush is right" that often. Or ever.

If the west, especially the liberals in the west, stop petting the Palestinian militants on the head and giving them cookies when they blow shit up, maybe we could actually make some progress, dammit.

[partiallyclips.livejournal.com]

This fiercely moderate centrist seconds that. The sides in this conflict are not morally equal, in my view.

[shsilver.livejournal.com]

Agreed. Not surprised. He's never been known for his tact and diplomacy.

[rdmaughan.livejournal.com]

Morally equal?

A shoots rockets at B killing civilians
B bombs A from aircraft killing civilians

Neither of these is good. Is one more evil than the other? Who cares neither of them should be doing what they are doing.

[partiallyclips.livejournal.com]

I'm just stating a position. My position was reached after a couple of decades of gathering information, weighing and investigating the claims of all sides, and without any notable interest at stake. I recognize criminal acts on the part of Israel over the years, including some which are not widely acknowleged.

But on balance, I find those acting for the Palestinian cause to have the more disturbing and disgusting record by about an order of magnitude. I can't bring myself to sympathize with a culture which raises its youth to aspire to blow themselves up at coffee houses and school bus stops. It's not people but a mindset there which simply has to be killed, one way or another. We didn't have to kill every German to rid the world of Nazism. And once rid of it, Germans showed themselves to be perfectly moral and civilized people. The mindset and culture that created Hamas has to be wiped out. I don't pretend to know how, but if I were Israel I would be attacking now too.

And before you point out that we're talking about Lebanon here, the same is true for Hezbollah. Their chosen tactics invalidate their cause, to my mind. No evil they claim to fight is as bad as what they choose to do. If I were President, and some group in Mexico with elected representation were being allowed to lob missiles at San Diego, and cross the border to kidnap US soldiers, I'd bomb every bridge and power plant from the Rio Grande to the Guatemalan border.

[shsilver.livejournal.com]

There is also the fact that when A shoots rockets at B killing civilians, they are actively targetting the civilians, although A claims that no citizens of B are civilians.

When B bombs A from aircrafts killing civilians, they drop leaflets prior to the bombing warnign civilians to seek shelter and to remain away from bombing sites if at all possible.

[zibblsnrt.livejournal.com]

If one has the intent of killing civilians, then yes, one is more evil than the other.

(I really don't see why that point's so hard to understand lately.)

[tropism.livejournal.com]

A:'s stated goal is the genocide of B, and now that they, as a political party, hold seats in both Lebanon and Syria, genocide has been legitimized as a political agenda i nboth of those countries.

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

Pab, I'm absolutely not going to get into the issue of blame (although, if you guys want to, by all means use this thread for it -- just play nice, mmkay?) -- I've already admitted I simply don't know enough about the issues. But I really, really suspect there's lots to go around on all sides. And, bluntly, above and beyond issues, if Dubya really wanted this stopped, at least a cease-fire could be gained pretty quickly by quietly threatening to cut Israel off. At which point Israel announces a 24- or 48-hour cease-fire, and if Hizbollah does anything, they look terrible. Can't remember which blog I saw that on, but I thought it made a lot of sense, at least in the very short term.

[filkerdave.livejournal.com]

Have you read the Hezbollah charter?

I'm not sure they care about looking bad.

Hamas

[baronet.livejournal.com]

That's the Hamas charter, not the Hezbollah charter.

Re: Hamas

[filkerdave.livejournal.com]

Ack, so it is. My bad.

OTOH, I note that the official Hezbollah site always puts Israel in quotes, since they're committed to the destruction of the state.

There aren't any easy answers.

[skemono.livejournal.com]

That sounds great, Mr. Smith, except that it wouldn't work. Remember the recent "cease-fire" between Hamas and Israel? Basically all Hamas did was say they were having a cease-fire, then continue their assaults against Israel. And whenever Israel got fed up enough to retaliate, the newspapers said that this action by Israel would "threaten the cease-fire."

It's a nice sentiment. But it wouldn't work.

[palenoue.livejournal.com]

And if the US right-wing would stop petting Isreal on the head and giving them cookies when they blow civilians up, maybe we could make some progress on that side of things as well.

I _do_ know a lot about what's going on, and blaming one side entirely while ignoring the other's activities is part of the problem. Until both sides are held accountable, it's going to be "an eye for an eye until everybody is blind" mentality for a long, long time.

[pabsungenis.livejournal.com]

And if the US right-wing would stop petting Isreal on the head and giving them cookies when they blow civilians up, maybe we could make some progress on that side of things as well.

You are correct as well.

[aota.livejournal.com]

I so want to make that picture into a weird parody icon.

[lil-shepherd.livejournal.com]

I sometimes wonder, speaking as a British citizen, if, when the IRA were blowing things up and many people in Ireland were supporting them, if we had used the RAF to take out Dublin's infrastructure and a few hundred isolated farmhouses and then claimed that we were only defending ourself, whether the US government would have supported us to the extent they are supporting Israel. Somehow, I doubt it.

[partiallyclips.livejournal.com]

If half of Ireland were effectively controlled by the IRA? And Sinn Fein had a dozen elected representatives in the Irish parliament? And missiles were regularly raining down on Belfast from IRA bases? And IRA soldiers crossed the border and kidnapped British troops? And the IRA's stated goal was not "ending the British occupation of Northern Ireland," but "the destruction of England as a sovereign state?"

Then I think the answer is yes. Yes, we would have.

[lil-shepherd.livejournal.com]

Dublin has had to tread a very fine line over the past one hundred years. It has had to clamp down on the IRA because one of the IRA's aims was the overthrow of the Irish government - now there's an irony, in view of your statement about not wanting "the destruction of England as a sovereign state". (Actually, it did, though IRA's quarrel is often more with the Scots, but there you go.)

At the height of the Troubles, people in Northern Ireland were being killed every week by IRA and UDA/UVA bombs and bullets, but the IRA at least were pretty safe on the other side of the border - not to mention in the States. Come to think of it, most of their arms were (and are) supplied from the States - but you are too big to chuck bombs at. The Irish government knew - and still knows - that a large minority of its people supported the IRA. Hence that fine line. (It was not always so. In the Second World War, the Irish came as close to supporting Hitler as they dared.)

Though the British occupy what the Irish government (and a lot of people in Britain) think should be part of Irish territory, the majority of the people who live in said territory are not seeking freedom from oppressive British military and ecomonic rule. We have not destroyed the whole infrastructure and economy of the Irish Republic. We don't send tanks rolling over the border to knock down houses or target. We aren't putting settlements in Northern Ireland. We haven't invaded current Irish territory or built a hulking great wall in Irish pasture or tried to ruin their economy. Even before both countries entered the EC Irish citizens were free to come and go and work and live - and vote, by the way - in the United Kingdom as they pleased. There is simply no comparison with what the Palestinians have had to endure in the recent past.

Sien Fein does have half a dozen elected representatives in the Irish parliament. It also has a large number in the - suspended -Ulster parliament.

This whole problem in Israel started when Hamas kidnapped a soldier. A soldier is not a civilian and, if you believe yourself at war, has to be a legitimate target. In Ulster our soldiers were hated by both sides - and shot at and bombed and mortared by them.

[partiallyclips.livejournal.com]

This whole problem in Israel started when Hamas kidnapped a soldier. A soldier is not a civilian and, if you believe yourself at war, has to be a legitimate target.

Well, the problem in Lebanon started with Hezbollah launching rockets at civilian targets over an extended period of time, destroying apartment buildings, and killing civilians, etc. The Gaza soldier kidnapping was one thing, the 2-soldier kidnapping by Hezbollah was a second event and triggered the blockade/infrastructure bombings.

Israel believes it is at war with Lebanon, and I think has reason to. If the enemy state and the enemy populace make the attacks and kidnappings possible, then strategic bombing is fair game, just like bombing bridges and factories in Dresden in WWII. You destroy the enemy's capacity to make war. In Hezbollah's case that includes the delivery of those rockets from Syria and Iran.

An infrastructure attack can achieve strategic aims with lower casualties than ground assault; witness the NATO bombings of Yugoslav infrastructure leading to the withdrawal from Kosovo. Israel may yet be planning to invade southern Lebanon to take on Hezbollah. Given Hezbollah's actions and record, I personally believe it would be justified.

[filkerdave.livejournal.com]

I think if the Dublin government was as entwined with the IRA and behaving the same way...err, yeah, the US would have.

[lil-shepherd.livejournal.com]

Really?

The way they supported us over the Falklands? Or the current refusal of the Senate to ratify a mutual extradition treaty because they are afraid we might ask for IRA terrorists?

By the way, I'm not saying that we (the UK) didn't do awful things to Ireland back in the early part of the 20th Century. We did. (Though it is well known that the Irish Government, while it had (and has) to keep saying it wants a United Ireland, told the British Government something to the effect of "But not yet!")

The Israeli state came into being by terrorist acts (as it well remembered in this country because a lot of our soldiers and administrators got blown up or shot during it) though the French and the British must take a lot of blame for the original Palestinian Mandate. If terror is the only way someone can get what they want, then it is not surprising that it often has popular support.

Of course, as it was the Romans who originally threw the Jews out of Palestine (and there were many other peoples in Palestine at the time, some of which remained there until the creation of the state of Israel) perhaps we should blame the Italians (who are only parly descended from the Romans, but hey, they ought to apologise.) After all, what's two thousand years and a complete misunderstanding of the other person's point of view in the political scheme of things?

It's complicated.

[selenesue.livejournal.com]

"Bush curses Hezbollah during G8 luncheon" Sounds like he was sacrificing some chickens or some shit.

Maybe next year.

[trdsf.livejournal.com]

He's not my president. I voted for the guys who actually won the last two elections. Can't say I'm surprised, either.

If I might engage in a bit of plagiarism...

[unclelumpy.livejournal.com]

From BUSHFLASH.COM

Now, the mess in Israel/Lebanon- for once, I'm not gonna blame this one on Bush. The Israeli/Palestinian/Muslim conflict has long since become a self-perpetuating mass multi-generational exercise in victims becoming perpetrators, on all sides. The blame can be spread so wide, that I can't really point the finger at any one contemporary group. My position on the perpetual conflict over there is based upon Thomas Aquinas's assertion that effects all emerge from a "first cause."
The "First cause" behind the current troubles, in a modern historical context, was the bright idea by a number of turn-of-the-century european jewish socialists who thought that they could move the jewish people, en masse, into slice of land in an area already populated by folks who were, at best, hostile to them. For some inane reason, these geniuses thought that there would be no problems, and they'd get along just fine.
Now, before I proceed, I must, finally, shatter the myth that any criticism of Israel is inherently anti-semitic. One must understand that there was a substantial percentage of the Jewish community, worldwide, that was steadfastly against the creation of Israel, as such a state was (according to scripture) not to come into existence until the return of the messiah. The creation of Israel had nothing to do with religion or ethnicity- it was about politics, and questionable pipedreaming on the part of folks who just didn't know what they were getting themselves into (my, how things have changed...)
I'm not alone in this view. I live in an area containing the largest jewish population in the country, and the most vociferous critics of Israel that I know personally are (surprise!) Jewish. The "anti-semitic" label just doesn't apply, in this particular context.
That having been said, Israel now exists, and as any nation does (especially Nauru), it has the right to exist and prosper. There's little that I can say about the current insanity over there.

[unclelumpy.livejournal.com]

Oh, and Tom...

The Republicans who still support him at this point are the one's who would start spouting the Christian values of cannibalism if he ate a baby on live TV.

[zibblsnrt.livejournal.com]

How wrong is it that I kinda want to see that happen just to see the freeperdroids actually start doing that?

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

You are so not wrong about that one, Lump. There were seriously commenters on righty blogs this weekend cajoling because the Rapture was that much closer.

[unclelumpy.livejournal.com]

Is it really that far-fetched to believe that those who view something like the end of the world as we know it in a positive light are NOT the ones we want offering input on national policy?

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

Hell, I don't want their input on how to make a cheeseburger....

huh?

[pickledcritter.livejournal.com]

Tom, while I know and can completely relate to your feelings about the prez, why is that story raising your hackles so much? How does it make you feel so humiliated when apparently none of the *other* world leaders at the table knew the mic was on either? And how is it any different than any other time heads of state/leaders/politicians of all persuasions making unguarded comments when they thought they couldn't be heard?

Look, I'm not trying to defend him, I'm trying to understand why this particular faux pas got under your skin so much - is it the content of what he said? None of what he said should be a surprise to anyone - left or right. Is it that it happened at all? I can't recall a President in recent memory that this particular snake HASN'T bit at some point - multiple times, as a matter of fact :).

I actually think it's kind of humorous, 'cause it kinda reveals something I always wondered about - what kind of small talk *are* these powerful people making during these lunches/photo ops/etc we see on the news broadcasts all the time? And it turns out it's not much different than the things we say when we're shooting the shit with our friends when we're just hanging out...granted we're not usually concerned with freeing up another leader's security forces, but still...

Re: huh?

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

It wasn't his blather, although, as I mentioned, that isn't helping. No, it was the picture. That stupid fucking shit-eating thumbs-up grin, like he gon' git back in th' race this lap fer shure or is in a remake of BNL's "Pinch Me" video or thinks this is a particularly tasty pork barbecue. Or is trying to give the whole goddamn world the finger and he can't remember which one he's supposed to use.

That, juxtaposed with the headline, "Bush Curses Hezbollah...", just... gaaaaaah.

Re: huh?

[pickledcritter.livejournal.com]

Ah...OK - I didn't even notice the associated image (I guess that statement says a lot right there about his perception, hmm? I'm so used to seeing him in that light, I didn't even make the connection - sad, huh?)

[liddle-oldman.livejournal.com]

Perhaps, but he did let us know that Putin is a big country, just like Russia. That might be important.