So you support the genocide of all Israelis and Americans?

How silly you are, all exposed and hanging out. Pull your pants back up before you trip yourself further.

I'm presuming this is satire, because its hard to believe any sane, clear-thinking person would write:

How dare you relegate the past and present suffering of the jewish people BELOW the current suffering of the Palestinians, who, we all know, don't actually exist as a people anyway. Shame on you, you disgusting anti-semite.

If it isn't satire, please get some help.

Only in the U.S. do we pretend that Hamas and Israel are engaged in equivalent violence. Does Hamas have an air force? Does it have state of the art US weapons technology? Do it's crude rockets even explode when the land? 900 Palestinian deaths to less than 10 Israeli deaths. If you lived in the prison that is Gaza, what woud you do to get the attention of the occupying power to stop its blocakde? It's the US and Israel alone against the opinion in every other country. They are not wrong. We are and we don't care. That's because we know this is not about fairness, security or justice. It's about permanently settling and taking the Palestinians land to establish a religious state. It is time for the US to act in its own national interest and stop the blind support for Israel. The biggest driver of terrorism against the US is our morally unjustified support for Israel. What about our safety? Why do we refuse to act as an honest broker in the Middle East? Thank you Glenn for being one of the few honest voices on this vital issue.

Glenn: would you say that people like Marty Peretz are not essentially Jewish extremists?

I don't know what you mean by a "Jewish extremist." Peretz -- like many, many people -- is both Jewish and an extremist, but he's an extremist in exactly the way that all sorts of non-Jews are. What's the difference between a "Jewish extremist" and just a regular old "extremist"?

Is George Bush a Christian extremist or an extremist who is also Christian? Are the Taliban Islamic extremists or extremists who are also Muslim?

How does the widespread opposition to the Iraq war and other neocon policies among American Jews -- to say nothing of the fact that they are about the most reliable Democratic voting bloc outside of African-Americans -- fit into your little theory?

would you say there is any awareness within and without the Jewish community that there is such a thing as Jewish extremism?

I seriously doubt you could find a single Jew, let alone many, who would tell you there is no such thing as a Jew who is an extremist.

Would you say that all of this is unimportant, to discuss whether or not the motivations of some of these folks is a particularly extreme interpretation of the Jewish faith? are these questions vapid/inane?

Discuss whatever you want. I'm not trying to stop you. I just think that your singular focus on "Jewish extremism" is, at best, completely misleading and, more likely, suggestive of something other than a good faith attempt to analyze these problems.

I have a son who is half Arab (my wife is Egyptian descent).

Since the beginning of this event, I have been under stress, to the point of having nightmares.

Why? Not quite sure.

I do know that I am developing a deep core of hatred towards Israel.

I *can't* be the only one.

The United Nations is not fight[sic] to make decisions for other countries. They don't have a very good track record.

This is a blantant misunderstanding of the de jure international system and accepted rule of law.

It's quite clear that hegemonic states, like the US and Israel, seek to conduct their foreign policy in a modified version of post-Westphalian "balance of power" strategies, retrofitted for liberal-democracy promotion. This way of doing things is not just archaic, but extremely dangerous -- as we have seen. It is precisely this type of international system that led to the first World War (and thus the Second).

But what you seem to be forgetting is that, after 1945, the game changes. International relations become codified and accepted under the umbrella of the rule of law and the adoption of the UDHR, inspired by the two world wars and in the hopes that such things would never happen again.

Now, the United Nations may or may not have made a mistake in essentially creating the state of Israel, but Israel is the guilty cuplrit in its own criminal actions (indeed, Israel is in violation of several international laws, including specific passages of the charter and UDHR).

When hegemonic states like the US self-exempt from international responsibility, like removing themselves from the jusrisdiction of the ICJ after being found guilty of agression, the UN is weakened in its ability to enforce its own rules. But if you believe in the rule of law, then you should accept that it means a great deal that, whether or not those laws can be appropriately enforced, these states are still in violation of law regardless.

Such is the case with Israel (Gazan militants are also in violation according to the most recent security council ruling).

The point of the UN is that, after 1947, the only legal wars (read: just wars) are those fought by people wearing blue helmets. Skirting around the UN is thus the same as subverting peace, and the most contemptuous nations of the world are all guilty of this.

That China won't contribute a modern ground-to-air missile defense system. That would greatly reduce Israel's air strikes on civilian targets.

Ground-to-ground missiles with guidance systems would be a vast improvement over the 74Kg unguided skyrockets teh Palestinians have been using up to this point. Speaking of which, there were NO Israeli deaths due to the alleged Palestinian missiles up until the day the current attack on Gaza began, then sudden four Israelis were killed in a single day. Examining their individual stories is fascinating -- it's as if they'd been set up in a false flag operation. But I digress.

It's a shame that Mr. Friedman continues to breathe.