Glen,

I think the posit that the military strategy may well be to terrorize the civilian population into not supporting Hamas. I do not believe that this is the main reason for the brutal invasion happening now. I think this was the equivalent of our October surprise. BeBe Netanyahu is opposing this government in the upcoming elections. After the loss of so many tanks in the Lebanon affair, Olmert's government looked incompetent and wimpy. This has been a muscled attack against the Palestinians. Even the choice of weapons such as the white Phosphorous is "Jack Bauer" hard core. Ehud popularity is at an all time high. I believe that they have always followed the shred punishment approach in the Gaza ghetto. They have a long history of knocking down residential housing or sweeping raids when events take place. I think the course of this war is tied to their elections and ours. I believe they will be on their way out before Obama takes office.

Matt Yglesias' sober, even-handed, sophisticated commentary:

America’s leading foreign affairs columnist once again endorses collective punishment of Arabs.

This in much the same way that Osama bin Laden sought to “educate” American civilians about the price to be paid for supporting corrupt oil monarchies by killing people who happened to be in a prominent skyscraper, and the Al-Aqsa Martyr’s Brigade tried to educate Israeli civilians about the cost of occupation with this suicide bombing in Beit Yisrael? Or, I suppose, the United States when firebombing Dresden. As with his repugnant remarks that the point of invading Iraq was to send a “suck on this” message to Arabs everywhere, Friedman is positing a much sicker rationale for military action than its actual initiators have been willing to articulate.

That all sounds pretty familiar -- and not very even-handed.

Here's another example of false equivalency: the claim that Israel pulled out of Gaza=freedom for Gazans. No mention is made by Israeli apologists of Israeli control over land, air and sea; no mention is made of Israel continually refusing shipments of food and medical supplies.

Timothy, does Israel surround Gaza on all sides?

Because ondelette broke Mona's (recently promulgated) Law and posted in a language other than English---well, it's a word _I_ never heard before---I present the following definition, illustration, and discussion re: "squassation":

http://mcncirce.com/history1.html

and at sig

I haven't heard anyone refer to the Israeli-Hamas war.

Just because Glenn Greenwald says something does not mean you have to agree with it.

Reflexive nodding is the province of the top-down propaganda on right wing radio. Maybe you should challenge Glenn once in awhile. His word is not gospel, and his biases on this issue are as transparent as Hamas's attempts to "make peace."

however, that isn't very often...but people who post both from the right and from a position of anarchy have truly "stopped making sense"...even Elephantman sounds lost.

lol,lol,lol

my goodness Winsmith

You are simply stupid. -- omooex

____________________________________________

You are rendering yourself a raging clown...

... ♪ Too late; they're here. ♫

Dear Glenn,

I would be interested in hearing your thoughts about the connection between the almost exceptionless support for Israel by our elected officials and beltway media types and the phenomenon of concision, of which you spoke last month in your blog. My sense is that the connection is fairly strong, and that the reason we do not hear more criticism of Israel is that it goes against the received political wisdom and would actually require more than sound-bytes and op-ed pieces to begin to look plausible in the eyes of many. In effect, the mainstream formats for discussing this issue make criticizing Israel practically impossible (without coming across as anti-Semitic or a terrorist sympathizer).

I'm sorry, are you saying the Palestinians have no control over the people they elected? Or are you saying they do have control Hamas but should be left alone to continue bombing Israel?
You fricking psychopathic warmonger.

Just because Glenn Greenwald says something does not mean you have to disagree with it.

Make an argument that's not riddled with fallacies, and I'll be more impressed with your intellectual integrity. Remember that you were caught in a bald-faced lie in this comment section. The rest of us do.

Timothy, does Israel surround Gaza on all sides?

It does, actually, excluding a small part of its southwestern border. I can't see Egypt violating Israel's blockade, however.

Look, WinSmith. I appreciate you're likely still traumatized by Room 101, but spewing it all out over this thread isn't all that productive.

Come back when you have something intelligible to offer, will you?

Timothy, does Israel surround Gaza on all sides?

What did I write? You cited it after all:

Here's another example of false equivalency: the claim that Israel pulled out of Gaza=freedom for Gazans. No mention is made by Israeli apologists of Israeli control over land, air and sea; no mention is made of Israel continually refusing shipments of food and medical supplies.

Are you saying that Israel doesn't control the sea lanes off the coast of Gaza? Do you deny Israel controls Gazan air space? That they don't routinely refuse entry to food and medical supply shipments?

If you're thinking I'm unaware of Gaza's location, you'd be wrong.

"I don't join you in the conclusion that all is lost and all is corrupt, but I do understand it.

What I want to see is the Obama Administration and Congress step up and reinstitute some respect for the rule of law. Abolishing signing statements referencing the true evil there (Bush's concept of "unitary executive", which is repugnant to the Constitution), pursuing war crimes and felony wiretapping, and the like, etc. Obama alone isn't the one to be expected to cure all these things, but Obama can set the tone. And the tone must be respect for the law."

I don't believe all is lost; did I say that? No. I said, our current political institutions are irredeemably corrupt. As a New Zealander living in Germany, this reaches a bit further than just the US of A. Conflating "all" with "our political institutions" is a bit much! They are really not that important.

But I actually believe (seemingly unlike many Americans, including Obama and his OLC-designate) that the preamble to the Declaration of Independence describes a highly effective remedy against those who embark on a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object.

See if you can guess what it might be?

Of course, those who have faith in the current (or next) administration rather than in the Constitution that lends them whatever legitimate authority they exercise, have already submitted (in my admittedly cynical view) to despotism in principle, and this is especially true when the good and the bad are inseparable with respect to their actions but are separable only by their rhetorical devices.

But ... you know ... I could be wrong.

At the very least I greatly appreciate a civil discourse. There is hope for mankind yet.