legit question: since the Israeli thing, I've noticed

[Lerkfish]

both the positions and the argument style of neocons and some zionists are very close on this issue.

The argument style of the neocons is to swiftboat anyone who disagrees with them.
The argument style of some zionists is to accuse anyone who disagrees with Israel's current tactics is an anti-semite.
Neither argument actually addresses the topic, but only sidetracks into ad hominem treacle wells, conveniently

The position of the neocons is to reshape the middle east by destabilizing current arab and muslim states.
The position of zionists seems similar, though I'm less sure of that. Certainly if the middle east were "democratized" with US-friendly leaders, that would benefit Israel.

both want to claim the "moral high road" of self-defense while they are invading other countries. Both claim to be victims, which justifies in their minds any action at all they deem necessary, regardless of long term consequences.

both seem to ignore or simply rationalize any "collateral damage" that occurs during their invasions, and blame the surrounding population that's being invaded for those deaths.

Neither appear to be able to admit to a mistake, or accept responsiblity.

Both seem to feel the need to paint their "enemy" as evil, unworthy of negotiation or diplomacy.

Both said not just NO, but HELL, NO to a ceasefire.


so, here's my legit question: If my observations are correct, why are zionists democrats? Wouldn't their issues be better addressed at this point in time by republicans?

[Freedom_from_Chains]

1. That's what politics is about,

claiming the moral high road as justification to take other people's stuff.

[Lerkfish]

2. and I forgot this other similarity

a belief that its okay to completely destroy infrastructure that has no military significance.

[entanglement]

3. Good post. There are two reasons

(1) Their absence from the Democratic Party would allow other (contrary) opinions on the Israeli issue to emerge, which is obviously not to their liking. Their presence (and influence)in BOTH parties serves to ensure a tweedledum - tweedledee situation, i.e. one where the views of both parties on this matter are virtually indistinguishable.

(2) Some of them have a residual, lingering fear of the Republican Party because of the Christian fundamentalist base. Right wingers of all stripes have recently been using the term 'Judeo-Christian' as opposed to the plain vanilla 'Christian' used historically, possibly in an effort to emphasize their inclusiveness.

[Lerkfish]

4. thanks, very valid points

[Little Star]

13. Maybe I'm wrong but,

I think the christian fundamentalist base would the jews under the bus in a second flat. The fundies are doing that old, the enemy of my enemy is my friend thing, with the Jews. In truth, they have never cared much for them because jews don't accept Jesus as their savior and lord. This was confirmed to me again last night watching Joe Scarb. Last night the fundie lady, who loved Mel's "The Passion" so much, was really nasty to that jewish reverend. Mel is a fundie hero because of that flick. IMHO, that love fest between Fundies and Jews will be short lived and will return to the previous one of animosity.

[eridani]

14. Likudniks who think that allying with Christian fundie whackjobs--

--is a good idea need to have their noses rubbed in the fact that said whackjobs want them to conquer all of the Holy Land first. Then comes killing off most Jews while the remainder turn Christian.

[sendero]

5. I'll go you one further..

... PNAC could have just as easily been written by the Israelis as us. It sounds a lot more like a blueprint to solve their problems than to solve ours. I'll eschew the followup obvious comment.

[Lerkfish]

6. that is a VERY valid point. Why did the PNAC decide to START

"global leadership" in the middle east? The could have just as easily started in Venezuela, another oil rich country and a lot closer to home.

[Phrogman]

7. The PNAC are the Israelis

Foreign agents have infiltrated and subverted our government.

[Lerkfish]

8. I don't know about THAT, but certainly they have similar goals.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[KKKarl is an idiot]

9. ..

Jewish people are different in that many families are either 1st or 2nd generation Americans. I am an legal immigrant. Immigrants find it very hard to find a home in the republican party. They are very closed minded when it comes to accepting people of other cultures. The republican party mostly attracts rich, white & so called "christian" Bible beltees.

Now show me how can a self respecting Jew can be a part of that group. I think if the Bible belt had a whole lot of Jews they would began to hate them too.

Also although we support the democratic party & not this farce going on in Lebanon. Most of our democratic politicians support the war in Lebanon. This is where I fear we are distanced from our politicians. They do not want to support a majority of their base in trying to bring this to an end.

[Lerkfish]

11. thanks, valid points.

[liberal N proud]

10. Good observations

Thanks

[Lindacooks]

15. This is the point I raised on a thread that got locked because it was

called flame-bait.

And I agree with you - zionists certainly are better served by repukes.