Good Article. Good Blog (Pen and Sword).

http://zenhuber.blogspot.com/2009/01/monday-preview-home-of-bullies.html

I was hesitant to buy into the stories of Israeli forces using white phosphorus on civilians until I saw the AP picture of the incendiary airburst over Gaza City at the Voice of America website, and The Times confirmed that it had identified Israeli stockpiles of U.S. made white phosphorous rounds on the Israeli-Gaza border. White phosphorous and other incendiary munitions can create night illumination and smoke, but their main purpose is to burn things, like Tokyo and Dresden, and now Gaza City.

misleading to omit hamas militants' use of schools, mosques and residences

What? The Gaza Municipal Rocket-Launching Area was all booked up? They couldn't lease a spot a Cape Kennedy?

BTW, how much bigger and more developed than Israel is Gaza, anyway? How many superpowers, again, do the Gazans have supplying them? And Gaza's complete command of its borders, and supportive neighbors?

I mean, should I start saying kaddish for Israel? Does Israel even have a chance?

What Friedman is advocating would violate American law. On the assumption that America has rules against providing military support and weaponry to those who want to use them for purposes that would be barred under American law, is there something that could be done to stop this? Or is it OK to ignore this law if the Bush Administration doesn't like it? Does that apply to the Obama Administration too?

One rule concerning that was brought up by Kucinich recently:

Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) made the following statement about Israel’s violation of the Arms Export Control Act of 1976 (AECA) on House Floor this morning.

The AECA makes it clear that any defense articles sold or leased by the United States must not be used to escalate conflict. The disproportionate and collective punishment nature of the attacks on Gaza assure an escalation of conflict in violation of the AECA.

"My understanding is that the content of what Hamas wants to negotiate about (i.e. longer-term ceasefire) and the terms it's willing to accept (i.e. international monitors for weapons smuggling) have expanded significantly since the ground phase began. As I said, I haven't, nor am I inclined to find every link detailing this story. I gave you my sources and my honest conclusion of what I got from them. If you differ, you differ."

Its not a question of differing. There is no reference to weapons smuggling, only renewed patrols of the Rafah border by PA authorities. The main bone of contention here was that Abbas controlled the security services and did not allow Hamas to assume its control of the government--a stand backed by the US and Israel. Abbas is no longer technically president of the PA, so Hamas agreement could mean a number of things. And as I said, Hamas was seeking much deeper negotiations with Israel THAN ISRAEL would accept. Cast Lead, from any perspective, including that which seeks the most benefit for Israel, is a true failure. In short, your understanding is not supported by anything factual. You are seeing what you want to see.

Israel is now using white phosphorous in heavily populated areas. One Palestinian doctor reported a child who face, as he described it, had been melted off. Israel may also be using experimental DIME weapons that, aside from blowing the legs and arms off of people, may cause cancer in the survivors.

Israel has crossed a terrible line and now must immediately ends its mass murder of innocent Palestinians; they can no longer justify this assault as self-defense (which I supported). Now, they are war criminals.

Is Thomas Friedman now a champion of war crimes? Does his mustache now about this?

These guys refuse to retreat into the land of outright fantasy at the drop of a hat. And all the nudniks and hoodniks who post here have a strange reticence when it comes to fantasizing omnipotence! What's wrong with them?

Don't they know you can achieve omnipotence by always praising the more powerful party? Sheees, morons!

ALL WAR IS A WAR CRIME.

True. And all advertising is false, all politics is cynical, and rhetoric is just a fancy word for bullshit.

You make a good point. We should just stop talking about this subject.

Tell you what: you first.

Here's Libertyaintfree doing his or her Tom Friedman or Bill Kristol impersonation.

Obama should be done before Penn Primary

A registration drive will do Barrack no good in Pennsylvania,even if he were to win nomination now he is unelectable in November.

--Libertyaintfree

http://letters.salon.com/politics/war_room/2008/03/14/obama_pennsylvania/permalink/7eff564b768f21b07800ce83fdb34bd9.html

Yes Glenn, keep giving it to Tom Friedman & Israel. I was born & raisd in Israel & I assure you that the rhetoric you describe is even worse than you think. If anything, Israel's actions are a profound lesson that the terror strategy DOESN'T WORK. You would think Jews would have historical memory and compassion for what it's like to be sequestered in a ghetto and attacked, but instead here we have Gaza, a ghetto of 1.4 million people, patrolled by a prison gang (Hamas), and Israel's response is to drop unconvenional weapons on children's heads (and about half the inhabitants of Gaza are children). What have the Jews learned from their collective historical traumas? that they would rather terrorize than be terrorized. Have they learned any lesson of ethics or compassion? not that I can see. Any non-Jew who says this is classified as an anti-Semite. But my grandmother was in Auschwitz and I can speak up honestly. Thank you Glenn - don't ever mince words.

This salon board needs more threading... I believe my point was that Hamas was not the sunshine/flowers/rainbows ticket, and has always made a big point about being the real resistance to the "Zionist Interloper", so the depth of its willingness to negotiate was questionable.

Of course I fault Israel, as well as the US and the EU for freaking out about Islamists winning an election and trying to freeze them out, overthrow them, etc. instead of engaging. But, as I keep repeating, there are definitely two tangoing here.

Yes, and GFY for implying that I ever said anything remotely supporting the ethnic cleansing of Gaza. I never did. I, in fact, said that the radicalization of the people is a problem. I also noted that they were already radicalized to some degree, and their elected officials - the ones in power who we both agree should be negotiated with - were very radicalized, so the increase of radicalization probably won't have as big an impact on negotiations in the near future as Glenn is implying.

The long term is troubling, however, and if Israel doesn't try for some real settlement with Hamas and the PA after this offensive, I am going to be very disappointed.

Once again, shame on you for implying that I support the ethnic cleansing of Gaza. I never said anything remotely resembling that. This is another case of ascribing Israel and her supporters motives they never claimed and even disavow - just like Glenn saying that Israel is reasoning on the same level as a fatass like Tom Friedman. It's BS. Stop. You're just hardening war camps by twisting people's words. If people don't feel like they're being heard, they assume they have no partner for peace.