Israel/Palestine
Related: About this forumISIS vows to topple Hamas in Gaza, uproot 'state of the Jews'
The video statement, issued from an Islamic State stronghold in Syria, was a rare public challenge to Hamas, which has been cracking down on jihadis in Gaza who oppose its truces with Israel and reconciliation with the U.S.-backed rival Palestinian faction Fatah. "We will uproot the state of the Jews (Israel) and you and Fatah, and all of the secularists are nothing and you will be over-run by our creeping multitudes," said a masked Islamic State member in the message addressed to the "tyrants of Hamas". "The rule of shariah (Islamic law) will be implemented in Gaza, in spite of you. We swear that what is happening in the Levant today, and in particular the Yarmouk camp, will happen in Gaza," he said, referring to Islamic State advances in Syria, including in a Damascus district founded by Palestinian refugees.
Islamic State, also known as ISIS and ISIL, has also taken over swathes of Iraq and has claimed attacks in Egypt, Libya, Tunisia and Yemen. Hamas is an Islamist movement that shares the jihadis' hostility to Israel but not their quest for a global religious war, defining itself more within the framework of Palestinian nationalism. Deemed a terrorist group by Israel, the United States and the European Union, and viewed by neighbouring Arab power Egypt as a regional security threat, Hamas's struggle against ISIS-linked jihadis has not won sympathy abroad.
Israel's intelligence minister, Israel Katz, accused Hamas on Tuesday of partnering with Islamic State affiliates in the Egyptian Sinai - a charge long denied by the Palestinian group. "There is cooperation between them in the realm of weapons smuggling and terrorist attacks. The Egyptians know this, and the Saudis," Katz told a Tel Aviv conference organised by the Israel Defense journal. "At the same time, within Gaza, ISIS has been flouting Hamas. But they have common cause against the Jews, in Israel or abroad
http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/1.663836
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
LuvLoogie
(7,036 posts)HassleCat
(6,409 posts)People in Gaza better hope Isis does not make major inroads there. Any significant Isis presence will result in serious Israeli attacks. If Isis somehow takes over completely, Israel will level everything.
NBachers
(17,149 posts)leftynyc
(26,060 posts)it's beginning to look like Israel may be the only ones with the real stones and firepower to take are of these repulsive freaks. That would put the neighborhood in quite a dilemma - they hate isis also - would they accept help from the "Zionist menace"? Frankly, I doubt Israel would get involved (no reason to really) until they felt directly threatened.
grossproffit
(5,591 posts)Some would start sympathizing with ISIS. They're damned if they do and damned if they do.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)that ANYONE would take the side of isis over Israel makes me want to vomit. But I know you're right and hope Israel stays out of it unless directly threatened.
asturias31
(85 posts)...you will instantly come across the widely-held Arab belief that ISIS was created by those evil zionist Jews. (Since Jews, as all Arab Muslims are taught, are the cause of their endless humiliation and low position in the world So any new force that threatens Arab security clearly has a Jewish puppeteer at the strings.)
If Israel ends up attacking ISIS, the relTionship between Jews and ISIS will of course be immediately recast as "The Zionist enemy is butchering our Muslim brothers! Sisters! Children!"
Anything to keep the average Arab from looking behind the curtain at the real enemy.
grossproffit
(5,591 posts)I'm gobsmacked that some actually believe it. It's like I'm living in a parallel universe.
asturias31
(85 posts)He really believed Jews had an international conspiracy to take over the world. It's all he was ever taught. He and his Arab friends used to get together and talk about the Zionist enemy. And his loving and marrying a Jew didn't open his mind at all - I was just an exception to the rule; the One Good Jew in the world. Fundamentalism had closed his mind long before.
Marriage taught me a lot. I'm still liberal. But no longer clinging to mindless knee-jerk approval of a sometimes-opprssed minority group's ideology, simply BECAUSE they're a sometimes-oppressed minority group!
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)attitude that will continue to prevent the Palestinians from getting their own state. The Arab world would rather live under the nightmare of isis than negotiate with the Israeli's and everybody knows it.
asturias31
(85 posts)And at this point it's totally understandable why the Palestinians would hate Israel; I mean it's hard to be objective and even-handed when your life is crappy and bombs have fallen on your homes.
It just sucks because it didn't have to be this way. Not in the '20's, not in '47 and not afterward. There could be side-by-side lands, one Jewish and one Palestinian, trading and doing fine. But that would require Arabs to tolerate Jews living in their region without going all KKK over it... something probably most of them would have done happily enough, at least eventually, had their leaders not yanked their strings toward endless war.
Now? It gets worse and worse.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)leftynyc
(26,060 posts)is the only one that has any chance of working. And that will only happen when the Palestinians (specifically the ones in Gaza) vote in a peacemaker rather than a terrorist organization.
asturias31
(85 posts)(a) Hamas is t going to give their people a fair election with free speech for candidates and guaranteed security. This is Hamas. They kill people who oppose them.
(b) not much chance of any Gazan political party advocating peace or being appreciated for such advocacy, when so many have lost so much, and are raised on dreams of vengeance and honor rather than peaceful coexistence;
(c)if a peacemaker party were voted in, the various Islamist factions would simply overthrow them in a bloody little coup. They really are not big fans of the democratic process!
There is no hope, really.
asturias31
(85 posts)If Jews had done what Christians did (colonize, conquer, enslave and convert)
And what Muslims did (conquer and convert and enslave...don't know if they colonized)
Then Jews would have what those other Abrahamic religions have: namely high population numbers and a few dozen Jewish-majority countries where they could be safe from the constant threat of massacre by anti-Semites.
And if Jews had a few dozen countries - or, um, any - where they hadnt been historically hated, persecuted, and killed, then I don't think Israelis would have a problem throwing open Israel's doors and taking more chances on both loss of physical security and loss of demographic superiority.
But it is what it is: Jews have always been the peaceniks who got murdered; hence, unlike the Christians who stormed half the world, and the Muslims who stormed about of fourth of it, Israel is all Jews have. And history shows we need at least one damn place where the haters and murderers will leave us alone.
So demographically I don't see a way to incorporate the west bank and gaza into Israel proper. But of course I would like to see Palestinians have a normal life and build their own future. (Though Islamism makes it unlikely they will be free, even on their own land.)
One would think the American left - which rightly points a finger at Christian/western conquistador-ism, though oddly lets Muslim conquistador-ism largely off the hook - would appreciate this. The one Abrahamic religion that has NOT gone out conquering and slaughtering, yet has been - throughout history - victimized by the other two, is the one group that has an understandable human reason, and a decent ethical claim, for fighting like hell to keep their one little crust of protected space safe for "their own kind."
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)It'll probably be alerted on for having too much truth in it.
grossproffit
(5,591 posts)I hope they are not successful.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)gotten alerted on a totally innocuous post. Thankfully the jury left it alone 5-2.
I am new here, so perhaps less cynical than I should be. Let's hope for a reasonable discussion.
I am interested in what the BDS crowd here thinks of my points.
To stand in the US, on land taken (not too long ago!) from native people, Ezpecially if you are a descendant of Christian/western conquerors or Muslim conquerors...
....and look around at a world that is mostly Christian and Muslim due to those two religion's' history of conquest...
...and admit that conquest was wrong and Jew-hatred was wrong...
...and then climb on a moral high horse and point the finger at Jews (the endlessly conquered and murdered) for wanting one chip of land for safety, when you and yours have taken all the rest...
Well.... It's like American environmentalists whose lifestyle is supported by destruction of environments all over the world, but who feel free to blame native people who (forced onto a bit of poor land by the grabbineas of others), have the audacity to poach protected wildlife to keep from starving.
It's blindness, I think, more than evil.
Peace for all. And justice too. 
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)but unless you see the Palestinians as helpless victims who cannot do anything wrong EVER - and also see any story about honor killings, gays getting thrown off buildings, people getting stoned to death for freeking blasphemy - all these topics will be met with "the west is worse and Israel is especially EVIL - you will certainly get blasted and alerted and frowned upon. I stopped giving a shit about it a long time ago.
asturias31
(85 posts)Is very strong on both the left and the right. They just pick different targets.
Another big contributor to the mindset is "the enemy of my enemy is my friend.". In this case: Republicans are my enemy; they hate Muslims and love Israel (so goes the simplified caricature); so if I praise Islam and despise Israel I am a heroic fighter for Good.
The other contributors are the follow-the-flock mindset (all the other liberals hate Israel this week!) and the 'romantic cause célèbre' aura - same thing that once led so many bright and well-intentioned leftists to imagine the USSR a worker's paradise.
People can round out their opinions with nuance if given a chance. (Though many hate nuance and cling to the caricature of Good v Evil instead.)
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)about the friend of a friend argument. Also holds true for those who support the second amendment along with the other 9 in the bill of rights.
6chars
(3,967 posts)why not israel?
asturias31
(85 posts)If by "you have to start somewhere" you mean, one side has to extend the olive branch first...
Actually I think both sides have to extend it a little bit toward each other at the same time.
Hamas isn't going anywhere: they are a dictatorship and they speak for Gaza. As long as their position is that Israel has no right to exist, then it's pretty obvious Israel can't let down its security measures and lay itself open to people whose declared goal is to conquer and destroy the Jewish State!
But in a better world, Hamas would back down from that position and - as some Israeli recently suggested - turn away from militancy in exchange for Israel rebuilding Gaza. That seems fair to me, and good for everyone.
Why is it unlikely to happen? Because Hamas's power is in militancy, and in waving the rebel flag against the Zionist overlords (certainly they are not known for improving the lives of their subjects). Suing for peace just means that other Islamist groups will declare them effeminate and start killing them.
Hamas doesnt seem to mind gutting their region and impoverishing the people they claim to represent. So are they likely to give up their personal perks (riches, power, status) and risk their lives at the hands of rival Islamists - in addition to reversing course on their use of religion to bolster their militancy, and also admitting they've been wrongheaded all these years? I think that goes utterly against human nature. They will dig in and double down again and again.
And I wish I could say that a unilateral olive branch from the Israeli government - say, rebuilding Gaza with no quid pro quo - would prompt Hamas to extend one of their own.
But hasn't history taught the Israelis that that never happens? How many times have they been attacked now... Lets say, starting with the Palestinian Jew-killing festival of 1929? The removal of Gaza's Israeli settlers WAS the olive branch. It hasn't turned out well...
So, it's pretty dismal. But I'll take suggestions!
6chars
(3,967 posts)Maybe UNRWA can promote the idea of coexistence, ultimately making Gaza citizens (and in turn Hamas) more receptive to a future olive branch.
asturias31
(85 posts)But I don't think UNRWA is an independent group with a peaceful agenda. Since there are forty or so Muslim-majority countries they have a powerful voice in guiding the UN - and they mostly enjoy fanning the flames of I/P conflict rather than putting them out. More importantly, the UNRWA employs Gazans as I understand it, and all Gazans answer to Hamas (sometimes at gunpoint), so there is no separating the UNRWA from Hamas's agenda. That is why UN schools in Gaza teach the opposite of what you are suggesting.
I know a Palestinian guy (Ramallah) who used to work in Israel in some bygone day when Israeli security fears were less and many Palestinians worked and moved easily in Israel. He has warm memories of Israel and tells me he had many Jewish friends in those days. Peace probably had a better chance back then, when the two sides mixed and could see each other as nice folks. But how to go back to that? Too much understandable fear on the Israeli side; too much understandable rage and bitterness on the Palestinian side...
Little Tich
(6,171 posts)I strongly feel that a healthy consensus comes from taking into account the views of those I don't agree with. If there was nobody here to defend Israel anymore, I would move on.
However, I didn't appreciate one of your posts that was alerted upon, but not hidden.
asturias31
(85 posts)In which I said something like "all Arabs are raised to hate Israel."? I probably was too broad-brush. It's a shorthand way of speaking - like "Americans are big believers in free speech" ... One can always take a more up-close look and see that no demographic is uniform, even though the whole has certain recognizable characteritics.
Why don't you tell me what exactly you didn't appreciate, and maybe I'll understand your side better.
Little Tich
(6,171 posts)Apart from that, mostly anything goes, I guess.
BTW, I'm not anti-Israel. I'm just very critical of Zionism.
asturias31
(85 posts)I just responded to you elsewhere on this thread, on this intriguing topic.
We could argue about the difference between a defensible generalization ("Antebellum white southerners were all taught from birth that blacks were inferior"
and an ethnic stereotype ("Antebellum white southerners were all taught from birth that blacks were inferior."
Of course, it now occurs to me that making unflattering generalizations about dead folks from history is less offensive than doing it to live people. Meaning, you might be okay with a historian writing, in some future era, "Arabs of the early 21st century were taught to blame Zionism for their problems."
To which I would answer: if it's true enough to be acceptable at a future date, then it's true enough to write it on today's date too. Because today is when it's actually relevant to understanding the issues we are here to discuss.
And for the record, I have mixed feelings about Israel.
Anti Zionism? I always thought Zionism meant, "support for the modern-day state of Israel; the belief that Israel should exist.".
What definition are you using?
Little Tich
(6,171 posts)This is a problem with all nationalistic movements, so I'm not singling out Zionism in that regard.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)oberliner
(58,724 posts)Last edited Fri Jul 3, 2015, 10:22 AM - Edit history (1)
There is this weird dichotomy where on the one hand there is this claim that Israel is, as you put it, "the one damn place where the haters and murderers will leave us alone", while on the other hand there is the claim that Israel is under threat of being wiped off the map and is surrounded by enemies who despise and want to kill Jews.
While I certainly acknowledge that Israel is unique in that it is a place where Jews are the majority and do not have to deal with the issues they have faced as a minority in other countries, it is hardly a place of peace and security for the Jewish people. Ask the residents of Sderot, for instance, who had to deal with months of hearing sirens and hiding in bomb shelters. This is not something that Jews living in the US and Canada have to deal with on a regular basis.
It seems a bit incongruous for Netanyahu to call for the Jews of Europe to immigrate to Israel for their own safety while at the same time railing about "terror tunnels" dotting the Israeli landscape and drumming up fear of potential attacks coming from Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, and others.
asturias31
(85 posts)There are different types of security. For example, never in my life in America have I felt physically threatened because I am Jewish. It might be different in Israel. Here, I have physical security.
On the other hand, I have a rising sense in my gut - not quite fear, but something in that direction - due to Internet hate sites, news of rising anti-semitism everywhere, but mostly due to the one-sided screeds against Israel I now hear from the (theoretically tolerant, liberal, open-minded) friends that I grew up with and shared liberalism with, all my life. The hate they nurse against Israel and Israel alone - their blind conviction, their massing solidarity that hisses venom at my timid, lonely efforts to counter their lockstep narrative of Arab victimhood and Israeli evil - is frightening.
For many people, it may feel safer to be under rocket fire but among friends, than alone in a crowd of jeering strangers.
I read some article recently - man-on-the street interviews with Jews in different countries and what life was like. And I was struck by a German guy in his twenties who said, "Oh it's not bad for us here in Germany. I mean, it's not like you can wear a yarmulke out in public - but it's not bad.".
If that's what "not bad" means in Europe, I can see why many are choosing Israel. And the fact that my liberal friends dont care about the reality of antisemitism that they are now eagerly, if unwittingly, promulgating... makes me suddenly feel very Jewish and very alone. And that sweetens Israel's promise: "come here, because here, we all stand together."
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Since this is a US based website and most of us (myself included) are Americans, I would respectfully argue that Jewish life here is quite strong, especially in communities with sizable Jewish populations such as New York, Los Angeles, and other major cities.
In NYC, for instance, Jewish people walk around wearing yarmulkes in public and no one so much as gives a second glance. In fact there are some neighborhoods where it would be unusual to find a man walking around not wearing a yarmulke. I think there is not only a degree of camaraderie with fellow Jews, but also a sense of being a part of a broader multi-cultural community where people of all backgrounds are able to coexist with a degree of tolerance that one often does not find in Israel.
Israel has its share of racism and discrimination even among Jews. I am not sure that the "we all stand together" ideal is really put into practice in Israel as well as the slogan suggests. There is real, palpable tension between, for instance, the ultra-Orthodox and the secular as well as between Ashkenazi and Sephardim and Mizrahim - to say nothing of the often blatant hostility between the Jews and the non-Jews who make up a very sizable percentage of Israel's population. I think Israel is certainly no different from other countries in this regard where intra-personal tensions exist for a variety of different reasons.
As for "internet hate sites" and whatnot, if one spends too much time reading those sites one can get a very warped sense of what goes on in the real world. Yes, there are many liberals who rail against Israel but there are also many liberals who support Israel. If the worst thing you have to worry about is having an argument about Israeli politics with your fellow liberals on message board (and/or occasionally in real life) then that doesn't really seem all that terrible. You can find people who will rail against Israel everywhere, even in Israel. Just like you will find people who will do the same about the United States. Do what you can to try to have a reasonable discussion with them and maybe you can reach some common ground.
In any case, I think people should feel free to be critical of the government of Israel, especially now when it has a right-wing leadership just as we on the left would feel free to be critical of the government of the US when Bush/Cheney types are in charge. When things devolve into something other than criticism of government action and drift into the realm of anti-semitism (which sometimes does occur) then call those people out and challenge them on their views.
I just think it is disingenuous to present the narrative of Israel as a place where Jews live in peace and security with total camaraderie, just as it is disingenuous to present the narrative of Arab victimhood and Israeli evil. Israel has many positive qualities but also some very significant negative ones, and the United States is a pretty darn good place in the world to be Jewish.
asturias31
(85 posts)You and I agree completely on all of this.
I am not sure I am reading your tone correctly - you sound like you are arguing something. Where do you imagine we have differences?
I am glad Israel is out there. I am glad that many Jews have been able to move there - not beciase it is a land of perfect harmony, but because it was apparently better than wherever they were. Not everyone is born in NYC. But you know this. So I am not sure what your point is.
I was not about to make aliyah - but thanks for letting me know that arguing politics isn't the worst thing that could happen to a Jew. I am gonna assume that wasn't meant in the condescending way it struck me.
Again - what do you think we are arguing about?
oberliner
(58,724 posts)I too argue online with those folks you describe all the time and need to remind myself not to take such things so seriously (advice I sadly do not always heed).
In any case, I guess where I disagree with you is in respect to the points I made in my initial response - that is: how can Israel purport to be both a safe haven for Jews and a country that is in constant existential danger? That seems incongruous to me.
I would argue that the United States is much more of a safe haven for Jews than Israel.
Also, with regard to Europe, I am more supportive of those who work towards dealing with antisemitism in those countries and try to create an environment where Jews do feel as safe and secure as anyone else rather than encouraging them to leave. It annoys me when Netanyahu responds to an attack against Jews in Europe with "move to Israel" especially while the French PM is saying "France is wounded with you and France does not want you to leave. … The place for French Jews is France."
I would hate to see those centuries-old Jewish communities across Europe dwindle away to nothing. I admire the bravery of those who stay and fight the good fight.
asturias31
(85 posts)To me it's like: suppose a kid in Springfield is getting bullied in school because she is the only Jew at that school, in a city that hates Jews. The principal of the all-Jewish school might say, "Hey, come join us; you are always welcome here.".
In fact I would pretty much expect the principal in such a town to say exactly that.
But of course the Jewish school has the risk of being targeted by those same anti semites with arson or stone throwing or whatever. So it is up to the kid which set of problems she wants to take on. The nice thing is, she has a choice. We agree that that's good, right?
Now if the principal calls the kid six times and says, "Why aren't you coming, you moron! Get your butt over here!" - that's obviously nuts. Is Netanyahu doing that? I haven't listened to his words. But it seems unlikely. He has no power to yank anyone off to Israel; so him saying "Come on over!" is no more than an open invitation. It doesn't bother me at all.
But I share your attachment to the historic centers of Jewish life that are dying out. I was just reading about one of the few Jewish families that is hanging on in Malmo, Sweden. And a few months ago I read about Yemeni Jews - there are like 20 left and they live inside a wire fence.
I think those who stay are brave, too - but I find it wacky to blame Netanyahu if they don't.. He is not the reason malmo and Yemen and many other places have few remaining Jews. They left not because they were pulled but because they were pushed. And I blame those who did the pushing.
So there: I guess we can find a disagreement after all! But only a small one.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)From the Prime Minister:
"Israel is not just the place in whose direction you pray, the state of Israel is your home"
And from the Foreign Minister:
"I hope that French Jews will start immigrating to Israel in significant numbers.”
And from the Defense Minister:
"The safest place for Jews is in the national home of Jews"
http://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-to-french-jews-israel-is-your-home/
Those comments are quite different from "hey, come join us, you are always welcome here" and sound a lot closer to "Why aren't you coming, you moron! Get your butt over here!"
To emphasize the point - there is also this article:
Netanyahu compares France to pre-Inquisition Spain
http://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-compared-contemporary-france-to-pre-inquisition-spain/
If you read through some of what Netanyahu is saying there, I think you will agree that his approach is more along the "get your butt over here" lines, using rhetoric that is, to put it mildly, over the top.
This becomes even more problematic when you mix in the already prevalent stereotype that Jews are not as loyal to their home country as their fellow countrymen are.
In the case of French Jews, the state of Israel is not their home, France is.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)
Blue_Adept
(6,402 posts)On Thu Jul 2, 2015, 05:57 AM an alert was sent on the following post:
If you read Arab media and their readers' comments,
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=107970
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
This is bigot at best and very likely a repeat troll who has been here numerous times before
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Jul 2, 2015, 06:03 AM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: an opinion and partly pulled from another source...leave it
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)I have felt that way since the beginning.
samsingh
(17,601 posts)leftynyc
(26,060 posts)people alerting over and over again. Perhaps they'd think twice if alerters were public or there was some kind of rule about losing posting privileges to those who keep alerting and posts standing anyway.
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)If I was public or private when I did it, but perhaps the admins see that some would carry a grudge so left it anonymous.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)If you have, what has motivated you to do so?
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)If an post is morally offensive then it should be alerted on.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)will tell you all you need to know about the I/P issue on DU. Reality really has no place on this issue on this site.
asturias31
(85 posts)I don't think my opinions are bigoted. Any Arab baby raised in a liberal granolahead family and neighborhood and school, will turn out as good, bad, or mixed as any other kid in the neighborhood.
Humans adopt the views they are taught, that they see all around them. This is especially true when the message is tightly controlled and the penalties for expressing dissent are huge. Arab culture, governments, and the dominant religion aren't big on encouraging dissent and free thought - at least not these days. They once were, or so I've read in the history books.
Maybe someday they will be, again.
Little Tich
(6,171 posts)The post displays a negative attitude against a group of people, in this case Arabs. The idea that "the Arabs" somehow hate "the Jews" is a myth, and disseminating it together with some juicy descriptions would make me vote for a hide if I were to judge it.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)suggested and actually read some of the stuff that comes out of the Arab world about the Jews. Keeping your head in the sand about it is not an answer. Thankfully the jury knew better.
grossproffit
(5,591 posts)Some here deny that the Hamas Charter exists.
Little Tich
(6,171 posts)that are spread in some media about Jews. The problem is the automatic assumption that a group of people who are defined by ethnicity all should share a belief in these negative stereotypes.
The accusation should be more specific than "they all think that..." etc. Perhaps if there was a specific example, like an accurately translated video clip or a non-bogus examination of schoolbooks...
grossproffit
(5,591 posts)I see that here daily without rebuke.
Little Tich
(6,171 posts)For example, it's definitely OK (IMHO) to express the opinion that being pro BDS is anti-Semitic, as it's essentially an attack on a persons views, and not the person. In the same way, connecting being pro-Israel with being hasbara is also OK (IMHO). However, reality is more complex than these generalizations.
I never alert on posts, and when on a jury I let most of them through unless there is racist intent or a very obvious breach of DU standards. I have a low threshold for racist intent.
6chars
(3,967 posts)i don't agree that there is an automatic assumption here that those who support israel are hasbara. but the term is thrown around in various settings. the choice of this word seems to be a strategic move in a propaganda war.
hasbara is the hebrew word for "explanation." this israeli government at some point decided that the problem was that there was insufficient explanation of their positions, and provided a small amount of funding to some students to advocate for israel. they used the word hasbara to describe this program.
now, anyone who presents justifications of israel or its actions can be called of being hasbara. with the use of that term and given its history, it is not stated but it is implied that they are israeli funded agents being paid to present those justification.
the idea that there is a vast network of hasbarists infiltrating forums and message boards plays into conspiracy theories involving Jewish control (if you think about it, since Jews are 1/500 of the world's population)
the result is that any justification of israel is illegitimate by its nature, not based on its content but based on the fact that whoever made it is a hasbarist. with those who would justify israel thus disarmed, those who would demonize israel can say anything without fear of refutation.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)Look - the reality is that we could both find sources that back up our feelings on the issue. Another reality is that supporters of Israel on DU are routinely alerted on while only the most egregious anti-semitism gets the attention of those supporting the Palestinians. It's become laughably apparent to anyone paying attention.
Little Tich
(6,171 posts)I'm not going to comment on an unseen clip distributed by PMW and referenced to by Haaretz. However, it's possible that a documentary about Jews from Al-Aqsa TV may contain some anti-Semitic content.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)We're done here.
6chars
(3,967 posts)I didn't even notice that. Thanks for the congrats.
asturias31
(85 posts)I was speaking in generalities and I agree there all plenty of exceptions.
Have you ever seen a mosaic portrait - like if you stand back from it, it looks like the face of MLK or a map of the US of something, but when you go in close it's made up of a thousand little mosaic tiles that show different faces or colors? I think any group of people is like that: all individuals with a range of differences, but as a whole, when you stand back, you can draw some broad generalizations.
I read the Saudi Gazette a lot - you might start there. The editor (big news!) is actually female, so you can see her trying to insert women's problems and successes into what she publishes. Readers send in comments but they are heavily censored - it has been fun to figure out all the things they are not allowed to publish. It is certainly... Eye-opening! ... to read the mainstream Saudi take on religion, Zionism, social issues, treatment of expats... And it matches well with other Arab and Turkish papers in its treatment of I/P.
Also read Fars (Iran's state news engine). Be prepared for naked nuttiness.
Please also google "Wolf Blitzer blood libel interview" and you will prob be able to find something I saw on CNN a year or two ago. If you can't, I will try to dig up a link for you.
asturias31
(85 posts)Please keep in mind that these are the people Israel is supposed to negotiate with.
This is what Arabic kids are watching. This is what their seniors want them to know about - not Israelis even - but Jews. All Jews.
When I saw it on CNN, my first thought wasn't horror; it was almost hilarity...
Israel (by which I mean the government) does a lot of stuff that makes me really uncomfortable and/or seems downright wrong.
You probably feel the same.
The difference between us is maybe just that I see Jews in history - the people who were always peaceful while the Muslims went a-conquering. And ended up on ye short end of the stick because they WEREN'T conquerors. Ever.
And that I have a clear understanding of who hated who first. Jews started buying homes legally in the Brit Mandate in the twenties and were treated like the jumped-up n****rs bringing down the neighborhood. And massacred for it. (Please read up on the Shaw report (British investigation) of the 1929 rabid Jew-lynchings, mutilations, rapes...which finally, FINALLY, led local Jews to think about self-defense.)
And that I read the Arab perspective - such as the YouTube clip I provide, and the opinions in Arab media - and recognize how hard it is for Israel's government to strike deals with...folks like that.
Would love to hear your thoughts, though.
Little Tich
(6,171 posts)That's a pretty offensive blood libel and it reveals the ignorant views of Hamas. It's good
that Hamdan has to answer for what he said. It's also good that there is an unequivocally correct translation of these things.
As for your thought on Jews and Arabs, I simply don't think in terms of peoples like that. I think in terms of individuals and their characteristics that make up a group or a people, not the other way round. Peoples aren't a real physical thing, like numbers and money.
I think you should read up a little on the history of the Palestine mandate. I can recommend anything by Benny Morris or Ilan Pappe on the subject. I know for a fact that Benny Morris's "The birth of the Palestinian refugee problem revisited" is floating around on the internets.
asturias31
(85 posts)"whites in America's antebellum South were racist."
"Germans in the thirties were increasingly nationalist and antisemitic."
Would you alert on me for saying such bad stuff about an entire demographic who are, as you rightly claim, individuals?
I have no hard evidence to support those claims, after all. The vast majority of white southerners and '30's Germans left no diaries (or YouTube videos). I could present you with antebellum Southern political speaches, or the words of a leading German politician from 1933 - and point out that no one protested these speeches, as no one apparently protested Hamdan's. And doesn't that show widespread acceptance of the politician's attitude? Doesn't it show a people who accept extreme - insane - irrational - bigotry without blinking an eye?
You could then say "Well, it's good that that this ONE leading individual has been recorded saying this awful thing in public and going unchallenged - but you cant generalize about the unpolled millions."
In the case of Arabs: I lived in an Arab family and was part of the Arab community for years. I could put my personal experience and friends' anecdotes on the table as evidence of what mainstream Arab thought is.
And you could then say "Well, that proves nothing - you met only a speck of the Arab immigrant population; it's not statistically significant."
Perhaps there is some evidence you would accept? For example: a newsreel showing a stadium full of folks cheering Hitler might convince you that ENOUGH Germans were antisemitic that the statement, '30's Germans were antisemitic' is a reasonable thing to say, a d not unjust, in spite of the fact that surely tons of regular folks hated Hitler's ugliness?
And if you do what I do and read Arab media, and see ENOUGH statements from Arab leaders - imams - man-on-the-street comments, would there ever be a point where you'd admit that "today's Arabs are raised to blame their troubles on evil zionists" is a reasonable statement?
Because at some point, if I point you toward Arab news media ... and cite my personal experience ... and link you to a YouTube clip ... and and and... And your response remains "Oh but you can't prove it! And it's wrong to generalize!" then I would say you are working very hard at denying a demonstrable and defensible statement - as defensible as many generalizations you would probably agree with.
--"antebellum white southerners were racist"
--"1930's Germans were increasingly antisemitic"
--"Christian fundies are anti-gay"
--"Neocons are hawkish"
--"The Greek people are suffering under austerity measures"
--"Quakers are peaceloving"
--"cats like mice"
--"Gazans support Hamas"
--"Israelis are mean! Racist! Apartheid-lovers!"
All generalizations; all unprovable and inapprpriate by your standards, all slanderous. Because, let's not lose sight of the fact that every Quaker is a person, not a stereotype. I'm sure there are plenty who like to kick some ass.
Little Tich
(6,171 posts)without the argument becoming racist. It doesn't matter if the argument is made in good faith and not intentionally racist. A good example would be those who argue that Jews in the US are
Israel firsters. I can imagine quite a few people (not me) arguing that, and at the same time staunchly believe that they're not making an anti-Semitic argument. It's not the supposed fact that Jews are Israel firsters that is anti-Semitic, it's the assumption itself that is anti-Semitic.
It seems as if you're trying to make negative generalizations about Arabs. Don't.
This isn't about playing sorites, it's about the display of racist attitudes.
asturias31
(85 posts)One cannot speak about I/P without speaking about Arabs, Palestinians, Israelis, Muslim thought, Jewish thought. And one cannot speak of each person individually - Ms. Ali and Mr. Stein and so forth, on into the millions. That leaves supportable generalizations. And there are many here that speak with hateful negativity about "Israel" - whatever "Israel" is (a terrain? A government? All several million citizens? Are Arab Israelis part of the hated "Israel"?). Since these hateful comments are accepted, apparently they are not bigotry. Maybe this is because "Arab" is an ethnicity whereas "Israel" is a country...full of people from all over the world... who share no common background...except, well, that one thing...
As far as the "Israel Firsters!": I am not sure what that phrase means, but i hope that if you could point me toward American Jewish papers where I could see plainly that "Israel first!" is a dominant theme that far outstrips mutters of "Israel second,", I would not try to get your post hidden for speaking a demonstrable truth.
6chars
(3,967 posts)Little Tich
(6,171 posts)but it doesn't stop journalists from asking Bernie Sanders about his dual citizenship. At the same time, it's important to understand that Israel and "the Jews" aren't the same thing, and the link between the two is only indirect. Failure to separate those two can result in anti-Semitic arguments.
I would really recommend that you don't try to use polls and examples from media to infer that "the Arabs" are bloodthirsty or whatever. It will become racist, simply because it's a weak argument that only is held together by the assumption of a stereotype.
I feel that I'm going full circle here, and that there isn't much more to add.
asturias31
(85 posts)Last edited Fri Jul 3, 2015, 02:48 PM - Edit history (1)
I said they were taught to blame zionists for their problemss and I cited my sources for thinking so. I should have said "many Arabs" not "all Arabs" - but I doubt even that would satisfy some people.
We should both resign from this... I would do the friendly wavy-hand goodbye thing if I knew how.
asturias31
(85 posts)Understanding the mentality of the opposition, is crucial to understanding Israel's dilemma.
But many people want a simple Hollywood narrative - in which there must be a
Victim side and a Villain side.
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)and you're right there is a simplistic good guy bad guy mentality at work here reading through this thread should put the stamp on that for anyone
and welcome to DU
asturias31
(85 posts)Gimme some time... at the veterinarian now.
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)if they're using a cell phone, at least I have trouble with it 
so when you get to a computer just copy and paste the URL 
asturias31
(85 posts)Ok I rewrote the web address; let's hope it works.
It is from the 2014 Gaza war.
Kinda long but:
First five minutes: discussion of war and ceasefire attempt.
Minute five; Hamas leader asked about his curious words on Al-Quds TV, directed to Palestinian viewers.
Minute eight: actual clip of Hamas leader on Al-Quds TV, speaking Arabic (translation in subtitles) and telling his viewing audience about some curious Jewish customs.
asturias31
(85 posts)The URL address that plays the clip is
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)Hamdan explains, but Blitzer keeps digging and gives us an edited clip that does not allow for context, he said it was in answer to Moshe Feiglins calls for genocide, I guess that edited statement far more and is more valuable than Hamdans repeated saying we don't have a problem with Jews but if the blood libel is the preferred belief then go with it, it's your choice
BTW Blitzer makes clear he didn't want the context of the words, he wanted denial that they were said at all, even though he has it on video
asturias31
(85 posts)My favorite part is where Blitzer says "I am going to remind you of what you said by playing this clip" and Hamdan starts yelling "I know what I said! I know what I said!" in what sure looks like a desperate, rattled attempt to keep his actual words from being actually shown.
C'mon: the entire interview is a Hamas guy giving Hamas talking points, evading every reasonable question by going back to "Israel is to blame.". Hamdan did 95 percent of the talking, and Blitzer let him. It would have been nice to see a longer clip had Hamdan not monopolized the interview for the previous 8 minutes.
If he were an American pol -if Ted Cruz gave that same interview - would you find him trustworthy?
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)azurnoir
(45,850 posts)grossproffit
(5,591 posts)This is the disgusting rhetoric that some pretend doesn't exist or was taken out of context. The usual.
asturias31
(85 posts)He may have been taped while on stage with his theater group, rehearsing his lines for a play about the middle ages.
That's actually the only context I can think of that would excuse him. Perhaps his defenders can think of others?
Response to azurnoir (Original post)
grossproffit This message was self-deleted by its author.
Igel
(35,359 posts)without ideological politics getting in the way of things like human lives and economic/social stability, strategically advantageous thing would be for Israel to join up with Assad. Assad's men with Israeli's using their superior firepower to do for Assad, with reasonable boots on the ground, to do in the West what the US and Iraqis say they're going to eventually do in the East.
And then un-alienate the Sunnis, somehow. After all, if two armies are going to fight against a common foe, they should do it in tandem and not serially. That kind of cooperation also fosters the possibility of working together on other things. Say, peace between Syria and Israel? After all, Assad's already a pariah.
Of course, that can't happen. We'd rather have the current situation than doing something that's embarrassing but may save lives. We can claim the high ground and self-convincingly blame Bush II, so it's a win-win for us.
And there's the risk of making into even more a jihad for a wider range of Sunni loonies.
Other potential allies are too invested in anti-Jewish rhetoric. To help Hizbullah even discretely runs the risk of radicalizing many members even further or arming those who'd turn on you asap to kill you. Jordan's mostly out of it, as far as I can tell. Iraq's not going to be interested--they're in bed with the anti-Jewish Iran. And many, for sure, would immediately scream, "Remember the Osirak!"
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Early on 1 July, up to 70 jihadist militants belonging to the Islamic State wilaya (province) in Sinai launched a complex assault on Sheik Zuwaid, in the northern area of the Sinai Peninsula.
According to social media sources, the militants simultaneously attacked four government buildings, a police station, and eight security checkpoints along the security zone set up by the Egyptian army to block militants' movements between Sheikh Zuwaid and Rafah. The militants used a combination of suicide vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices (SVBIEDs), IEDs, RPGs, ground forces, and snipers on the roofs of adjacent buildings.
Security sources said that militants planted landmines along roads around the city to prevent reinforcements from reaching Sheikh Zuwaid, suggesting a level of sophistication and planning previously unseen in Sinai, but observed in Iraq before the Islamic State's takeover of Mosul.
http://www.janes.com/article/52674/islamic-state-s-attack-in-egypt-s-sinai-likely-to-be-a-probe-ahead-of-seizing-territory-indicating-shift-in-strategy
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the on-going security situation in the Sinai Peninsula Wednesday afternoon, expressing solidarity with the Egyptian regime and warning that, "ISIS is not just on the Golan, they are in Egypt as well, near Rafah, near our border."
Netanyahu, continued on to say, "We are partners with the Egyptians, and many other states in the Middle East and the world, in our battle against radical Islamic terrorism. This terrorism is directed by two different entities- Iran, and the radical Shiites, and ISIS and the radical Sunnis, as well as factions like Hamas."
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4675174,00.html
6chars
(3,967 posts)now that they have a common adversary?
bemildred
(90,061 posts)asturias31
(85 posts)Doesnt ISIS remember that a couple years ago Hamas cracked down on the sinful UN-sponsored Gaza Marathon, and prohibited females from tempting men by running in public?
Hasn't ISIS paid attention to the charming extrajudicial executions of "Israeli spies", the growth in righteous honor killings of impious females, the religiously proper beatings of disobedient wives, the pious attempts at forcing hijab on whorish females in government buildings, the expenditures on military might rather than silly kids' stuff like caring for civilian needs, and the glorious call for the murder of all Jews, just as Mohammed spoke of?
ISIS and Hamas have plenty of common ground. Let's hope they can settle their unfortunate pissing contest and work together for a beautiful - and free!! - Palestine, with liberty and justice for all.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Or are you relying on a translation?
Specifically I'd love to know what was translated to "state of the Jews" (if the original statement was in Arabic).
Do you have the text?
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Wednesday's terror attack was the largest ever carried out by the Sinai Province, Islamic State's Egyptian affiliate, since it began its fight against the government in Cairo some four years ago.
It also marked the most painful blow suffered by the Egyptian military in its war on extremist Islamist terror, which it is bent on eradicating.
It was a well-planned attack, carried out by dozens of ISIS operatives in northern Sinai, and the explosions and weapons fire were heard loud and clear in Israel.
Amid concerns that ISIS may try to spread their attacks in the direction of Israel - and in the past there have been several instances that started with clashes with the Egyptian army in Sinai and ended in infiltrations into Israel - the IDF decided to raise its preparedness along the border and to close the Kerem Shalom and Nitsana border crossings. The crossings were reopened on Thursday.
http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Analysis-Egypt-is-losing-its-war-against-ISIS-in-Sinai-407822
i Want to take note here of the fact that the Egyptian military is now flying jets around in the Sinai, which I presume is done with IDF approval.
6chars
(3,967 posts)ISIS seems to be getting to the point where they can cause some discomfort in numerous locations. From the last couple weeks' headlines it seems this ability has even expanded.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)It grows by transmission, not accretion. It is fed by GCC money, Baathist revenge, and a propaganda war. It is way past time to worry. A franchise operation, you can start your own franchise. Just declare allegiance to al Baghdadi and begin raping, looting, and pillaging, lop off all your old enemies heads. Then go solicit funding from the loonies in the GCC.
Well said!
I find the idea that ISIS can be defeated on the battlefield kinda silly. The battlefield victory will, yes, shut down large-scale horrors like the ethnic cleansing of Iraq's Christians and the wholesale slaughter of Yazidi men and sex slavery of Yazidi women.
But the ideology of resentment, vengeance, kill-the-kuffar, go-to-heaven, etc... That doesn't get stamped out. That remains forever, and with that ideology there will be ongoing suicide blasts and terror attacks. IHow can this change, unless Islam itself is recast by new interpreters?
But the conditions for that do not currently exist.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Ideologies are all stupid shit when you look at them, people buy that sort of crap when their life sucks and they have nothing better to do. Give them a decent fucking job and a family to take care of and they will leave you alone too. It's this sitting around in refugee camps and walled compounds with nothing to do that gets people thinking about acting out.
asturias31
(85 posts)The middle class westerners who are leaving Europe and Australia to fight the glorious jihad.
(Medical students, bright high-schoolers, young families, people described by friends and parents as "just an average, fun-loving kid."
Nor does it explain that a huge cashflow to ISIS and other jihadists comes from wealthy gulf countries like KSA - from incredibly wethy people who lack for nothing, who live where men are men and the livin' is easy.
The slick ISIS websites are recruiting tools - and they are not aimed at desperate people in refugee camps who lack computers. They are aimed at Muslims with mainstream Muslim ideology: our people are oppressed; the longlost Caliphate was our golden age; Allah enjoins us to fight for islam; those who fight the good fight are rewarded in jannah; glory days can come again if we are brave enough and pious enough.
(Disclaimer: please don't tell me these are "stereotypes" or "Islamophobia.". I am intimately familiar with a mainstream Muslim school; I have spent years reading Muslim websites, books for Muslims, etc, and I know plenty of Muslims very well. If I am to be slammed for making generalizations about a people, then no dialogue is possible. One can't talk about ISIS intelligently without talking about the mainstream Muslim beliefs that give it legs, and the 7th century Muslim behavior it is copying.)
ISIS sites have a huge Twitter following, and not among desperate refugees. The answer is not as comfortable as "Muslims are drawn to ISIS because they are poor and hopeless."
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Youthful rebellion against an order that offers them nothing but boredom is hardly new. You would not believe some of the stupid shit the Christians fought over back in the day, minutae of dogma. That does not happen because the dogma is so compelling, that's horseshit, the dogma is not compelling, it happens because people want some action and the dogma gives them a reason. And there are always guys around who want nothing better than to rouse a mob and lead it off against someone else.
You are right that the GCC money and Baathist military and political experience and Saudi religion have added a special flavor to the mix, but it seems to have taken on a life of its own now, and it's spreading.
asturias31
(85 posts)The youthful lust for adventure is definitely a driving force... I empathize with the kids who join ISIS because, well, I could have been one of them, 30 years ago.
But if that's all it is, why don't we see middle class non Muslim kids joining ISIS - or running off to similar adventure zones like the Ukraine border or south Sudan? Why aren't these bored Muslim kids in the west joining the Peace Corps or hiking the Rockies instead of glamorizing the new bloody Caliphate? Since they have money for plane fare to Turkey, why don't they check out the caves of Cappadocia and the Greek ruins on the Aegian coast?
In my lifetime, the call for Muslim warriors has been sounded in Afghanistan, Kashmir, and Chechnya - and each time, men from across the ummah answered the call and took up arms in wars that were cast as "Us Muslims being oppressed by the unbelievers.". Those men would tell you they fought because they were Muslim and their faith commanded it and their God rewarded it. The people who go to ISIS say they are going for God and to build a caliphate, not for excitement. You're gonna lecture them that they don't know their own motives?
To pretend ideology isn't a huge chunk of this, takes a lot of pretzeling.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)That's not what I said, I said it is not the controlling or initiating factor, Muslim kids might go for muslim religion or ideology, white rural kids might go for white power, kids in Nagaland join the Naga resistance. Where you start to get in trouble is when you leave them with nothing to do. When I was a kid in LA there was thought to be a big problem with "juvenile delinquency", these were the kids that later went on to be hippies and fought the Vietnam war. It was understood perfectly well back then that leaving us to stand around on street corners and form gangs was a bad idea. The problem always was nobody wanted to pay for anything more than cosmetic, dances at the park and "good clean" places to go hang out. Not a real job, not a real adventure, just more pleasant boredom and being not important.
Anyway the west is just awash is such "useless eaters" these days, thanks to automation and neoliberal economics, so it is no surprise at all that many would start to make their own arrangements.
asturias31
(85 posts)In post 80 you said they join ISIS because they are poor people in refugee camps - "give them a job and family and they will leave you alone".
I say ISIS appeals to middle class people in free lands and rich lands - people with jobs and families - and then you blame teenage boredom.
I point out that this is quite a
Muslim-specific style of boredom,
and not just among teenagers
- and now we are back to blaming economics.
We could go on like this forever. Let's call it off.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)asturias31
(85 posts)I like debating too much, and there's never any end to it of course - and DU seems to be sucking up too much of my brain and free time.
Am waiting to see if the charms of DU will wear thin on their own... or if I will have to go cold turkey so I can get my life back.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)It's that intermittent positive reinforcement thing, same thing Facebook relies on. All those "likes" are so gratifying, the thrill of vindicating your view of things, it's heady. A lot of people think it's real.
asturias31
(85 posts)It's that little thrill of "someone agreed with me! I knew I was right all along!"
God, I am a sick sick person...
uppityperson
(115,681 posts)asturias31
(85 posts)I don't want to spend hours and hours here. I try to get out, but it-- it's like-- it's like quicksammmphhhh....
bemildred
(90,061 posts)A newspaper close to the Egyptian government says the Islamic State-linked group that attacked troops in the Sinai Peninsula on Wednesday used sophisticated weaponry, including Russian-made Kornet anti-tank missiles.
In a graphic on its front page Thursday, el-Watan daily says the attackers also used mortars, anti-aircraft guns and other guided missiles.
An Egyptian security source told The Times of Israel the fighters used a massive supply of anti-aircraft missiles in the first hour of the attack, forcing the Egyptian army to respond with F-16 fighter jets rather than Apache helicopters.
The attack, which included a wave of suicide bombings and assaults on security installations by dozens of militants, was Sinai’s deadliest fighting in decades. Security officials said dozens of troops were killed, along with nearly 100 attackers.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/is-said-to-have-used-anti-tank-anti-aircraft-missiles-in-sinai-attack/
Little Tich
(6,171 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)But yeah. I dunno how bad it is yet, but it's not good, no kind of good, and it could get worse any time.
The fact that these guys could put together this sort of attack suggests they have found better sources of supply. ATW and AA guns are a step up. Yemen perhaps. Sinai is known for smuggling.
The Muslim brotherhood was calling for a revolution after a dozen of their guys got killed in a raid too.
And al Sisi is frothing with rage.
On the other hand this seems to have created a new unity among Israel, Hamas, and Egypt, they are all afraid of the jihadis.
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)ISIS Stole Some Shiny New Weapons From the Iraqi Army
http://www.vice.com/read/isis-stole-some-shiny-new-weapons-from-the-iraqi-army-989
Iraqi Prime Minister Says ISIS Seized 2,300 Humvees When It Took Mosul
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/01/iraq-isis-humvees_n_7487254.html
URGENT: ISIS seizes 3rd largest military base in western Iraq and takes its tanks, heavy weapons and supplies
http://www.iraqinews.com/iraq-war/urgent-isis-seizes-3rd-largest-military-base-western-iraq-takes-tanks-heavy-weapons-supplies/
The arsenal of terror: Detailed report reveals the range of machine guns, armoured vehicles and explosives used by ISIS fanatics... and how stolen NATO assault rifles are reserved for 'elite' troops
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3061006/Islamic-State-weapons-rubble-Kobane-reveal-heavily-armed-terror-group-uses-anti-tank-aircraft-missiles-crude-IEDs-eastern-European-assault-rifles.html#ixzz3elLZeEkx
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)If Putin can ride a bear and a Ritz in a gif then anything is possible.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)I think it said something to that effect, and in any case there is lots of old Russian stuff laying around. I doubt that Putin is trying to help the jihadis, they scare him too.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)A member of the Algerian opposition movement Rashad has warned that Egypt is heading down a similar path which led to Algeria's war in the 1990s which resulted in the death and deportation of hundreds of thousands of people.
Mohamed Al-Arabi Zitout, who is also a former Algerian diplomat, added that the current regional and international circumstances will eventually turn in the Egyptian revolution's favour even if a high price has to be paid first.
He noted that some Egyptians are giving in and staying silent, some are fleeing the country and others are taking up arms against the government, which could result in the interference of foreign and regional powers in the country's affairs.
According to Zitout, this is reminiscent of the Algerian model with the cycle of violence leading regional and international intelligence bodies to intervene and turn the war into a dirty war.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/news/africa/19613-egyptian-regimes-war-on-terror-is-reminiscent-of-algerias-war
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)I'm not surprised.
They are equal opportunity genocidal murderers.