I personally find the militarism of Israeli society a terrible thing, and I wish I could change it. However, it is a natural outcome of being under attack from many directions for many years. I can assure you that Israelis consciously try to rise above human nature, but I don't suppose they always succeed.

-- zenwick

You are aware, of course, that the Irgun, which played a prominent role in the formation of modern Israel was itself, a terrorist organization.

No, I don't suppose they always succeed either.

GG to Zenwick & me: "Do you have any particular attachment to Israel -- emotional, cultural and/or religious -- which makes you view it as more than just another foreign country?"

Yes.

"maybe the reason I think Israel is virtually always in the right is because that's the side with which I was trained to identify -- religious, culturally and/or emotionally."

Glenn, if you read my posts, you will find that I appreciate Israel's flaws, and for example I don't agree with the current attacks. I think they are counter-productive from both a political and religious standpoint. I agree that they are largely an unfortunate artifact of the coming elections.

I am only here to respond to those who excuse anything and everything the Palestinians might do, and condemn anything and everything Israelis do, because of their belief that Zionists are Nazis, period. I personally feel that such a viewpoint can only stem from basic anti-semitism.

If one looks hard at the historical and political record, one can see there are two peoples, each trying to establish their own state. The difference is, with few exceptions, the Palestinians seem unwilling to accept a state of their own unless Israel is destroyed as part of the deal.

Done decades ago by Peter Cook & Dudley Moore originally for the Edinburgh "Beyond the Fringe" festival. I only want to excerpt a snippet of the dialog between Sir Arthur Streeb-Greebling (Peter Cook) and the Interviewer (Dudley Moore).

I: So how did World War II affect the Frog & Peach?

SASG: World War II? Oh, absolutely ghastly, that. I was opposed to it.

I: Well, yes, I think we were all opposed to it.

SASG: Ah. But I wrote a letter!

Like you, I think we should stay out of what I will call the Israel issue. And, we certainly shouldn't be providing them with some of the finest military hardware around free of charge which they then use to kick everybody's ass in the vicinity with impunity. You speak of polls that show the American people opposed to our mindless support of the state of Israel. How many of these people have written letters? I know I have but I'm just one person. SASG's faith in the letter was, of course, misplaced when it came to WWII but I don't think it would be so misplaced today. If the Israeli's thought that they wouldn't have the endless stream of bombs and rockets from the US every time they started blowing people up, maybe they wouldn't do it so often.

It doesn't mean you're wrong, but I really don't understand how that thought doesn't occur to you: "maybe the reason I think Israel is virtually always in the right is because that's the side with which I was trained to identify -- religious, culturally and/or emotionally.

Excellent points, you are exactly paraphrasing Orwell's 1946 essay on Anti-semitism in Britain.

I defy any modern intellectual to look closely and honestly into his own mind without coming upon nationalistic loyalties and hatreds of one kind or another.

It is the fact that he can feel the emotional tug of such things, and yet see them dispassionately for what they are, that gives him his status as an intellectual.

It will be seen, therefore, that the starting point for any investigation of antisemitism should not be "Why does this obviously irrational belief appeal to other people?" but "Why does antisemitism appeal TO ME? What is there about it that I feel to be true?"

If one asks this question one at least discovers one's own rationalisations, and it may be possible to find out what lies beneath them.

Because friends don't let friends commit war crimes.

Whatever short or near-term benefit Israel may realize from this attack, it will be disastrous to Israeli security in the long-term. Just as those who argued against the Iraq invasion partly on the grounds that it increased the liklihood of future threats to our national security were nonetheless called traitors and unAmerican, those Jews and gentiles alike who protest that Israel's actions ultimately will increase the threats to it's existence are labeled antisemites. That some who are speaking out against the invasion actually are antisemitic does not help.

This is such an emotional issue that it takes a great deal of courage for prominent opinion leaders to even state their opinion. More need to follow Glenn's lead, and tell the public what a huge mistake the combined Israel/U.S. pro-war policy is.

If actions that are deemed uncivilized and barbaric by standards of international law are allowed to continue, whether they are committed by the U.S., Israel or both together, whatever has been of greatest value in our Judeo-Christian heritage will be effectively destroyed. These actions also invite retribution and increase the national security threats to both countries.

Persons and countries are the product of the actions that they choose to take; that is how character develops. To make bad choices over and over will change a country's character and that of the persons in it. As King Solomon once said, "For as a man thinketh in his heart, so is he."

If we become like the barbarians we self-righteously denounce, we lose our way; we will become what we despise.

"Do you have any particular attachment to Israel -- emotional, cultural and/or religious -- which makes you view it as more than just another foreign country?"

Yes.

Does that attachment to Israel color your view as to who is right and wrong, and what is and is not justified, when it comes to Israel's various wars with its neighbors and enemies?

Does it color your view about whether the U.S. should give special treatment to Israel and what the extent of its support and protection should be for that foreign country?