Benjamin Kerstein offers up one of the most idiotic opinions you will ever hear a human being utter while you inhabit this planet. Namely, that any and all criticism of Israel means that one is an anti-Semitic bigot. Think I’m exaggerating?
“But surely you believe,” they always ask you, “that you can criticize Israel without being antisemitic?” It is an obnoxious and patronizing question in and of itself, of course, in that it is obviously an admonition that all civilized, thinking people must answer “yes” or “of course” or “naturally.” It is important, however, because of its true answer, which is unequivocally, unquestionably, and objectively “no.” …
Whether one wants to admit it or not, we are living in an age in which a global campaign exists for the sole and specific reason of legitimizing the destruction of Israel and the expulsion or annihilation of its Jewish population. Iran’s own president is straightforward about wiping Israel off the map. Islamists call for it every five minutes somewhere in the world. Western academics and activists regularly hint at it with such euphemisms as the “one-state solution” (an Arab state, in case you were wondering), and their constant apologetics on behalf of anti-Jewish terrorism. And as the recent atrocities in Toulouse have shown us, the Jews of the Diaspora are not and will not be spared the bloody consequences.
As a result of this campaign – which is antisemitic by any definition – any and all criticism of Israel not only can be but must be antisemitic. It is either subjectively antisemitic, in that it consciously and intentionally furthers the goals of the campaign; or it is objectively antisemitic, in that it unconsciously and unintentionally does the same thing. The distinction, if there ever was one, between the two, is now meaningless.
As non sequiturs go, this one is quite audacious: there are people who are opposed to Israel’s existence, therefore Israel is absolutely perfect and anyone who dares to criticize anything that country does must explicitly or implicitly want it to be destroyed. Back to logical reasoning 101 for you, Mr. Kerstein.
88 comments
Skip to comment form ↓
matty1
April 3, 2012 at 12:13 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Who are these people who advocate a ‘one state solution’? I only ever come across the phrase from people criticizing it.
Oh and SLC in 3…2…
Ray Ingles
April 3, 2012 at 12:23 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
George Orwell once wrote, in WWII, that pacifism was “objectively pro-fascism.” After the war, he actually apologized. And admitted that when passions run high, “To admit that an opponent might be both honest and intelligent is felt to be intolerable. It is more immediately satisfying to shout that he is a fool or a scoundrel.”
I’m pretty sure Kerstein is no Orwell, and will never apologize.
TCC
April 3, 2012 at 12:24 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
As opposed to the current “one-state solution,” which is good and great and unquestionable.
I’m not opposed at all to the existence of Israel, but seriously, it takes a lot of chutzpah to make this kind of leap.
eric
April 3, 2012 at 12:26 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
any and all criticism of Israel not only can be but must be antisemitic.
I think we can reasonably assume that any Israeli who doesn’t vote for the top 2-3 Israeli parties is critical of one or more current Israeli government policy. If they didn’t have some policy beef with the current government, they wouldn’t vote against them.
The Lorax
April 3, 2012 at 12:29 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Huh.
1. There are people who want to kill X.
2. Killing X is a bad thing.
3. Any criticism of X is not going against those who want to kill X.
4. Therefore, any criticism of X is helping to kill X, and is therefore evil.
Replace X with Israel, and that’s what you get above.
Replace X with… oh… say… atheism.
flyv65
April 3, 2012 at 12:31 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@Matty1:
“Oh and SLC in 3…2…”
What does Salt Lake City have to do with being anti-semitic? Ohh, way a minute: never mind.
slc1
April 3, 2012 at 12:32 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
So far, the real hard core Israel bashers haven’t yet appeared so I will disappoint Mr. matty1 by holding my fire until they do. Counter-punching is more my style.
dingojack
April 3, 2012 at 12:33 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
“… we are living in an age in which a global campaign exists for the sole and specific reason of legitimizing the destruction of Israel and the expulsion or annihilation of its Jewish population“.
Really? Got any proof of this extraordinary international conspiracy?
Oh I see your next gambit (an oldie but a goodie) :-
Iran’s own president is straightforward about wiping Israel off the map.
Really? Is that a fact? And you have absolute, uneqivical proof do you? Or is this a multiply debunked case of piss poor translation (for effect perhaps)?
Islamists call for it every five minutes somewhere in the world.
Such as…? Citations please! Oh and provide evidence that expressing an opinion is now a crime. (A case of becoming, through unreasonable fear, the very monsterous regime you fled from?).
What a weak attempt at an arguement. Still I’ll predict we’ll see worse here (not mentioning names, but you know who you are).
Dingo
Area Man
April 3, 2012 at 12:36 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I don’t know who Benjamin Kerstein is, but unfortunately, his viewpoint is quickly becoming the default among the Greater Israel faction (or whatever you want to call them). Any and all criticisms of Israeli policy have for awhile now been shouted down as anti-semitic, anti-Israel, pro-Hezbollah, etc., and the mere fact of being Jewish, or even a Zionist, will not protect you from such accusations. The only difference now is that the policy is being explicitly stated and rationalized; they want you to know that it’s no longer just name-calling, they’ve logically deduced that you must be an anti-semite and will wear that label whether you think it makes sense or not.
slc1
April 3, 2012 at 12:41 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re Dingojack @ #8
Really? Is that a fact? And you have absolute, uneqivical proof do you? Or is this a multiply debunked case of piss poor translation (for effect perhaps)?
Actually, the mistranslations are by Prof. Juan Cole, which the late Christopher Hitchens pointed out several years ago. The notion that the Iranian president and the mad mullahs that run Iran haven’t called for the elimination of the State of Israel is the big lie.
a miasma of incandescent plasma
April 3, 2012 at 12:42 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
That’s great, I was wondering when we would start changing the meanings of words and not just how itz speld, lol kewl!
In totally unrelated news, editors now hate authors and books.
Jadehawk, cascadeuse féministe
April 3, 2012 at 12:50 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
weeeeell… not quite. What he’s actually doing is twisting the “intent is not magic” argument that not meaning to perpetuate a harmful social trend doesn’t magically result in no perpetuating a harmful social trend.
But I’ve yet to see any evidence that a trend that is actually destroying Israel exists (as opposed to a trend among a minority to more-or-less impotently wish for such a destruction), or that criticizing specific Israeli policies in any way contributes to the ongoing destruction of Israel.
Improbable Joe
April 3, 2012 at 12:54 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
It probably started on a personal level for Benjamin Kerstein… he started out thinking that he was perfect, and that anyone who criticized him was doing so out of hate and jealously. He’s just extending that out to everything he believes.
Bronze Dog
April 3, 2012 at 1:01 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
The assumed bigotry gets more ridiculous from my perspective: I’m largely an outsider when it comes to questions of Israel. I lack strong opinions largely out of ignorance of the politics. For me, rhetoric equating any criticism to automatic bigotry only serves to make the speaker look heavily biased and that makes me distrustful of their ability to give accurate information about the issues.
It falls into the same tribalist trap I see in America, when extremists reflexively call me “Anti-American” for criticizing my government. Such labels are only deserved if someone gives out consistently irrational, hypocritical, or selective criticism.
Michael Heath
April 3, 2012 at 1:10 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Ed writes:<blockquote<Benjamin Kerstein offers up one of the most idiotic opinions you will ever hear a human being utter while you inhabit this planet. Namely, that any and all criticism of Israel means that one is an anti-Semitic bigot.
The newsworthy riff off this observation is that this is the exact same argument, using the very same supporting premises, we heard from Sarah Palin in ’09 and now nearly the entire set of Republicans running for national office.
gshelley
April 3, 2012 at 1:20 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Is he aware that Israel in not a totalitarian one party state? That there are people within Israel who disagree with Israeli policies? That they have elections, where the citizens get to vote for who they want and don’t want, and for what policies they support or oppose?
Raging Bee
April 3, 2012 at 1:25 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
slc1: you haven’t disappointed matty, you’ve acted exactly as he predicted you would, by showing up automatically even though you had absolutely nothing intelligent to say.
Counter-punching is more my style.
Seriously? Your latest counterpunches have been so lame I’m beginning to wonder if your heart is really in it anymore.
dingojack
April 3, 2012 at 1:25 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
SLC –
Still stand by the Big Lie? How good is your Pesian BTW?
Dingo
Raging Bee
April 3, 2012 at 1:31 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Oh, and how does ArmoredDinnerJacket’s rhetoric prove that everyone who criticizes Israel is an anti-Jewish bigot? “One of Israel’s critics is a bigot, therefore everyone else who criticizes Israel is also a bigot” doesn’t fly. It’s called “guilt by association,” and the association in this case is, at best, laughably tenuous. In fact, it’s no better than “all Muslims support al Qaeda.”
Raging Bee
April 3, 2012 at 1:32 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
And who do we have to thank for creating a political climate where this sort of nonsense is taken at all seriously? The Republicans.
slc1
April 3, 2012 at 1:33 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re dingo the bingo @ #18
Ms Nazila is a native Farsi speaker, Cole is not. End of discussion.
Re Raging Bee @ #17
It would be difficult to provide anything less intelligent then that provided by the Fairfax fucktard, Mr. Bee.
Raging Bee
April 3, 2012 at 1:40 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
In that case, Likudnik boy, give yourself a pat on the back for successfully performing a difficult task.
Ing: I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream So I Comment Instead
April 3, 2012 at 2:04 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Am I the only one who criticizes Israel because I ultimately support it and don’t think it’s strategy is working?
dingojack
April 3, 2012 at 2:10 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Ms Nazila (who is not in evidence BTW) and Mr Cole disagree.
You need reminding about the meaning of ‘unequivocal’?
Dingo
Raging Bee
April 3, 2012 at 2:13 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Let’s see how easily this guilt-by-tenuous-arbitrary-association can be turned around: Some well-known bigots support Israel for the explicitly-stated reason that they expect Israel to bring about the End Times prophesied in their holy books; therefore everyone who supports Israel does so for the same reason and no other. Agree or disagree, slc1?
Area Man
April 3, 2012 at 2:29 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Let’s put aside who may have mistranslated whom.
Is there anyone stupid enough to think that Iran is in any way capable of invading Israel even if they wanted to? Israel is about 500 miles from Iran as the crow flies, more like 1000 if you consider the limited travel options. Iranian troops would have to march through at least two additional countries, either Turkey then Syria or Iraq then Syria or Jordan. None of these countries would ever let a million Iranians march through them. Oh, and last I checked, Israel has a darned good air force and could pound a troop column from pretty far away.
Obviously, any talk of invading Israel or “wiping it off the map”, even with the most unsympathetic translation, is just chest thumping for the home crowd. That pro-Israel fanatics view this as an existential threat is a sign of how far gone they are, and how little rationality these discussions have.
slc1
April 3, 2012 at 2:30 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re Raging Bee @ #25
I strenuously disagree as the notion of the End Times is total booboozie. However, I can understand why pro-Israel folks are not adverse to soliciting the support of folks who think otherwise. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Area Man
April 3, 2012 at 2:30 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
ANTI-SEMITE.
slc1
April 3, 2012 at 2:34 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re area man @ #26
I doubt that even Bibi is concerned about an invasion of Iranian armed forces. What he is concerned about, and with good reason, is the possibility that a nuclear armed Iran would attempt a preemptive strike with nuclear weapons to satisfy their desires. Of course, such an attack would also annihilate most of the Palestinians but nobody in charge in the Arab world really give a shit about them.
slc1
April 3, 2012 at 2:36 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re #23
I would agree with that assessment. What is needed is for the Government of Israel to stop playing paddy cake with the terrorists in the Gaza Strip and apply Hama Rules.
Tobinius
April 3, 2012 at 2:38 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
slc1 says:
With friends who want to see your destruction to bring about their sought after “End Times,” who needs enemies?
Improbable Joe
April 3, 2012 at 2:40 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
There are people who think that Islam is an existential threat to all of Western civilization, so by comparison the pro-Israel fanatics are actually showing a little bit of perspective. At least some part of Iran’s army could physically get to Israel if they were motivated enough, although at that point I’m guessing any one of a half-dozen other countries take over Iran while their army is on the march. The whole thing is sort of silly when you really think about about it for more than 30 seconds.
Area Man
April 3, 2012 at 2:54 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
What “desires” would those be? Getting a hard-on by watching Tel-Aviv go up in flames only to have Iran’s 10 largest cities get nuked?
I’m pretty sure the implausibility of an Iranian first strike has been done to death already, so there’s no need to rehash it. Let’s just suffice it to say that whatever goober-headed statements Ahmadinejad comes up with are unrelated to Israel’s security.
KG
April 3, 2012 at 3:02 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
True – if for no other reason, because only those ignorant of Iranian politics think Ahmadinejad is in charge of Iranian foreign or nuclear policy.
slc1 just lurves him some mass-murder, so long as the target is right.
Raging Bee
April 3, 2012 at 3:04 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
StupidLikudnikChickenhawk1 wrote:
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
So it’s okay to have insane bigots on your side (anti-Jewish bigots, I must add), but when we criticize said bigots, and the sheer stupidity of calling them friends, we’re labelled “anti-Jewish?” If Israel’s “leaders” are “thinking” that way, they don’t deserve to stay in power.
Besides, “The enemy of my enemy is my friend” isn’t exactly a physical law — especially in the Middle East — so counting on religious fascists to help you, just because they also happen to hate some of the same people you hate (or so they say at least), is a really stupid idea. These are the same people who a) supported the Nazi regime, and b) wanted Jews to have their own country so they wouldn’t come to America instead. If those are the people you call “friends,” then your country is doomed by its positively shitty diplomacy.
Oh, and don’t even try to re-start the “nuclear Iran” argument. Your arguments on that subject were already punk’d, junk’d and debunk’d, in more than one Dispatches thread, and you ended up slinking away in shame each time.
Raging Bee
April 3, 2012 at 3:09 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
What is needed is for the Government of Israel to stop playing paddy cake with the terrorists in the Gaza Strip and apply Hama Rules.
Yeah, look how well “Hama rules” are working for the Syrian regime!
slc1
April 3, 2012 at 3:10 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re area man @ #33
What “desires” would those be? Getting a hard-on by watching Tel-Aviv go up in flames only to have Iran’s 10 largest cities get nuked?
The mad mullahs who run Iran think that it would bring on the 12th Iman.
Re KG @ #34
Killing terrorists is not mass murder. It’s justifiable homicide.
slc1
April 3, 2012 at 3:12 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re Raging Bee @ #36
I don’t know, it looks like Assad is winning to me.
slc1
April 3, 2012 at 3:14 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Actually, that should read the 12th Imam.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/12th_imam
Raging Bee
April 3, 2012 at 3:27 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Killing terrorists is not mass murder.
“Hama rules” are mass murder. Get the difference straight, you stupid racist asshole.
Raging Bee
April 3, 2012 at 3:36 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I don’t know, it looks like Assad is winning to me.
“Winning” what? Are his people any freer, safer, or more prosperous?
The fact that you could look at a country torn apart by a civil war (possibly verging on proxy war) and call that “winning” really proves (again) what an uncaring piece of shit you are. As does your belief that this is a worthy example for Israel to follow.
slc1
April 3, 2012 at 3:40 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re Raging Bee @ #41
In the case of the Assad kleptocracy, winning means retaining power. They couldn’t care less how many people they kill.
laurentweppe
April 3, 2012 at 4:28 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Albert Einstein: World’s most famous zionist
Albert Einstein: World’s most famous anti-semitic bigot
Thr wingnuts’ version of quantic theory is fascinating
Raging Bee
April 3, 2012 at 4:36 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Okay, so you think Israel should follow the example of a kleptocratic regime that doesn’t care how many of its own people they kill. Duly noted.
And…you want us to nuke Iran, with no provocation, in support of a kleptocratic-regime-wannabee. Also duly noted.
Winterwind
April 3, 2012 at 5:26 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@ RagingBee #19
I understand that you’re mocking his name because he’s a representative of a tyrannical regime, and you would probably still make fun of him if his name was John Smith.
However, this comes close to one of my pet peeves, which is mocking people with “foreign” sounding names. I’ve noticed many progressive people online who believe it’s funny to form childish puns on foreign dictators’ names (e.g. Saddam Hussein). I wonder if it occurs to them that not all people with names like Ahmadinejad are foreign tyrants. Quite a few of us are Westerners, and inadvertently suggesting that our names are ridiculous, foreign, exotic or silly because they come from non Anglo-Saxon roots can be alienating, especially in the context of constant anti-immigration rhetoric about people who should assimilate by taking “sensible”, “easy” names like John Smith, or go back where they come from because they don’t really belong here.
@ slc1 #29
Iran may be part of the Islamic world, but is it part of “the Arab World”? I believe most Iranians would disagree. Don’t they consider themselves super-special Aryans (because they speak an Indo-European language), as opposed to the Arabs and Jews who are inferior Semites?
Or do you consider all Muslims to be Arabs and vice versa? Take care not to conflate the two…
slc1
April 3, 2012 at 5:36 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re Winterwind @ #45
Well, I knew that someone would point out that Iranians are not Arabs. Absolutely agreed. However, neither the leadership of Iran or the leadership of the Arab countries gives a flying fuck about the Palestinians, who are consider pests in the Middle East.
Azkyroth
April 3, 2012 at 6:04 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Dude, outing SLC isn’t cool…
Crip Dyke, Right Reverend Feminist FuckToy of Death & Her Handmaiden
April 3, 2012 at 7:44 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
No: this is factually wrong, Ed. In his essay, for what it is worth (and that is less than the electricity that communicated it) he states that the language used is anti-semitic, NOT that the person is an anti-semite and/or a bigot of any kind.
He actually gets is right in that one need not be a bigot to say anti-semitic or bigoted things. People say such things out of ignorance, a slip of the tongue, or a desire to quote someone else on the way to debunking a crappy argument.
So all the stuff above about the speakers of such things = bigots totally misses what he was saying. **However** this is not an endorsement of his argument. Clearly disagreements within Israel – y’know, the kind that accompany electoral democracy – prove that it’s possible to disagree with current Israeli policy without being a bigot. His insistence that the ability of a statement to be twisted to support an opposite end through misrepresentation means that the statement is “objectively” supportive of that end is ridiculous.
Also, I’m with ING @23. Too many of my friends visit Israel or have family there for me to be indifferent to the actions of the state.
dan4
April 3, 2012 at 9:38 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@48: Did you skip over the first paragraph in the block quote? Kerstein specifically answers “no” to the question if one can “criticize Israel without being antisemitic.” Kerstein clearly does NOT make any distinction at all between “anti-Semitic person” and “person who uses anti-Semitic language.”
dogmeat
April 4, 2012 at 12:02 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
So, let’s get this straight, indiscriminate slaughter of any and all Arabic speaking people occupying Gaza, reasonable policy, questioning the “reasonableness” of genocidal campaigns waged against innocent women, children, etc., “unacceptable racism?”
Seriously fucked up shit. Right up there with the asshats who see a repentant Hitler in heaven, but an atheist burning in eternal damnation for honest skepticism. Apparently the circle *is* now complete…
Quantum Mechanic
April 4, 2012 at 12:14 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
SLC1:
By no means; recall #29 of the Seventy Maxims of Maximally Effective Mercenaries?:
“The enemy of my enemy is my enemy’s enemy. No more. No less.”
Or were you planning on picking a side between Christian Sharia and Saudia-style Islamic Sharia?
StevoR
April 4, 2012 at 12:46 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Yes I do think you are exaggerating.
Perhaps Benjamin Kerstein pushes his argument a trifle too far but not by all that much and he does make some pretty valid points.
Not *all* criticism of Israel is anti-semitic but a hell of a lot of it – almost all in fact – *is*. denying that is denying reality and plain stupid or willfully ignorant.
Israel may not be perfect but its enemies are a hell of a lot worse and too often, too many are guilty of standing on the anti-semtic side of the Philo-semitic / Anti-semitic line.
There is an awful lot of anti-Semitism behind an awful lot of the Israel bashing we regularly hear from both sides of politics but more usually the Left. Often under the false pretences of supporting the so-called “Palestinian” cause aka “anti-Zionism.”
Please note that the “Palestinian” Arabs were offered a state of their own repeatedly and isreal has made constant painful concessions to them.
Jordan was created by carving off about two-thirds of the original British /UN mandate that became Israel.
Israel accepted peace plans that left it only half its current territory in 1947-8 which created an Arab state for the mostly Syrian and Egyptian migrants to the region who had followed the original Jewish settlers who were making the formerly mostly deserted deserts bloom. (Little known fact – the Late and unlamented PLO terrorist leader and former dictator Yasser Arafat was born in Cairo, Eypyt to Egytian family.)
That wasn’t enough – the Arabs still attacked the Jewish state and tried viciously hard to exterminate it in 1948. They’ve never stopped trying to committ genocide by wiping Israel off the map since – thus all the numerous Arab-Israeli wars all caused by the Muslim world’s failure to accept the Jewish states right to exist.
Isreal constantly tried to make peace – and has offered the Arab side virtually everything it wanted – except Israel’s complete annhiliation – and the Jihadist side has always turned peace down. There would have been a Palestinian state created long ago if that was actually what the “palestinians” wanted. It clearly isn’t.
Israel has voluntarily left parts of its territory such as Gaza and much of Judea and Samaria (sometimes wrongly termed the West Bank*) – captured and defended at a huge cost in lives and sweat and blood and tears inthe hope of the Muslims being reasonable and accpeting apeaceful “land for peace” deal. They got more terrorism, rocketfire and war in response. Yeah, they’re not likely to make that mistake again.
In short -and we could talk for hours on this – the “Palestinians” and rabas are the cuase of theri own suffering and don’t deserve any sympathy for what they keep bringing on themselves and Israel has the right to defend itself from attack and to keep its citizens living safely and in peace. Full stop.
Those who question those assumptions and who constantly apply a double standard – attacking Israel’s legitimate militay, security and political responses to Islamist terrorism and failing to equally question the atrocities and genocidal philosophies of Israel’s Jihadist foes like Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and Iran are being anti-Semitic whether they like and accept that reality or not.
Quantum Mechanic
April 4, 2012 at 1:20 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Citation needed, please… you know, unless that was just complete hyperbole. I expect better of the “good guys” of the piece than this, if for no other reason than they just keep fanning the flames. You also say that critics of Israel apply a “double-standard” on the slaughter or civilians. I’m going to need 3 or 4 citations for that; perhaps you might have missed the none-too-flattering digs at the Republican party as the POG (Party of God, a reference to Hamas)? This isn’t a fucking team sport, boychik. It’s possible to both like something in principle and object to its specific implementation.
Let me ask you: if “almost all” of the criticism on this issue is anti-Semitic, why do you find the ones most likely to throw around the term “Christ-killer” on the other side of the debate?
moebius2778
April 4, 2012 at 2:06 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@21
Why is this the end of the discussion? My understanding (at least as far as my linguistic professor has mentioned it) is that you want to translate into your native language, not out of it. Assuming that the speech was in Farsi and you wanted to translate it into English, a good translator would:
1. Have a good command of Farsi.
2. Be an native English speaker.
3. Be familiar with political speech/vocabulary in both languages.
Being a native speaker of the source language could potentially be a drawback, assuming it prevented you from being a native speaker of the target language.
donalbain
April 4, 2012 at 6:54 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Israel essentially has a health insurance mandate. Criticising the mandate is criticising Israel. Criticising Israel is evil.
KG
April 4, 2012 at 7:42 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Hama rules can only, of course, mean mass murder of unarmed people, including many childern, since that is what the Assad regime did in Hama. So here we see that slc1 is not only an advocate of genocide, but also both utterly dishonest and extremely stupid, in pretending he was talking about killing terrorists when anyone can look back and see he was advocating the mass murder of civilians.
slc1
April 4, 2012 at 8:12 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re KG @ #56
If one is going to make an omelet, one must break a few egg shells.
Ray Ingles
April 4, 2012 at 8:42 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
StevoR –
Y’know, for the first few decades of the Zionist movement alternate locations, like somewhere in South America, were live options, widely considered. (As was the idea of purchasing land, rather than being awarded by fiat.) Ultimately, though, the historical Israel area was chosen, primarily for religious reasons.
Anyway, I sometimes wonder how things would be different had the former option been pursued…
dingojack
April 4, 2012 at 8:47 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
SLC – ever heard of blowing eggs? Or you could make an omelette (or even scrambled, poached or fried eggs) using one egg (it keeps down the cholesterol levels.
Your analogy doesn’t even work on the most literal level, you actually expect anyone to think it might even be vaguely workable relative to a far more complex situation?
Seriously Dr Death, why not just call what you propose, what it actually is:
The Final Solution.
Dingo
arakasi
April 4, 2012 at 9:17 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I’m pretty sure that slc1 just argued that I have a moral obligation to shoot him in the head if I ever meet him face to face. There isn’t bit of difference between his rhetoric and that of the more extreme anti-Isreali bomb throwers
slc1
April 4, 2012 at 9:33 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re Ray Ingles @ #35
In 1935, the infamous Nazi, Adolf Eichmann, wrote a memo to Frankenberger suggesting Madagascar as a destination for Europe’s Jews.
michaelcrichton
April 4, 2012 at 10:44 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Exactly! That’s why us Gay Atheist Liberals are trying to impose Sharia Law on America.
gingerbaker
April 4, 2012 at 12:54 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Oh, sure, of course that was what SLC1 was advocating – the mass murder of civilians. And kittens, don’t forget the kittens.
By the way, I am a little unclear on whether there are any Palestinians actually left to be gleefully slaughtered. According to many, Israel has been committing genocide for over a decade now. And, according to these same people, Israel has an almost unimaginably horribly-beweaponed uber army – so ruthlessly proficient that the constant calls (which never occur, of course) for the destruction of the Jewish state must needs be mere forms of Islamic haiku – with which to carry out this wide-scale genocide. You would think they would have certainly got the job done by now, having had first-hand experience in the art form perfected by the Germans, but evidently not.
Quantum Mechanic
April 4, 2012 at 1:11 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Gingerbaker, perhaps you are unaware, but SLC1 has in the past proposed a “fully nuclear”, as it were, solution to the “Iranian Problem”. I’m sure the Dingo has a link somewhere, considering how often this keeps popping up. What else would you call that BUT genocide? It does prevent all that nastiness associated with post-regime change insurgency, namely by eliminating most of the populace for insurgents to hide behind, but most of us here generally find it lacking from a… moral standpoint. Well, except for for SLC1; some people like their solutions “over easy”.
slc1
April 4, 2012 at 1:31 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re quantum Mechanic @ #64
So that Mr. Gingerbaker not be burdened with searching Mr. Brayton’s archives, I will repeat my position, namely that there is no problem with Iran that can’t be cured by a half dozen well targeted 15 megaton bombs.
Quantum Mechanic
April 4, 2012 at 2:11 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
You mean OTHER than:
–The murder of millions of innocents whose only crime is to have been merely born in Iran.
–The inevitable fallout affecting the surrounding countries.
–The probable incitement of a religious war due to wiping the Mecca off the map.
–And last, but certainly not least from a tactical standpoint, the inevitable political fallout as nearly the whole world condemns them for it?
Why, sure! Other than that, there’s NO problem at all with nuking Iran and killing millions to off a handful of ruling elites who aren’t going to do jack shit other than rattle their sabres for fear of losing their cushy spots.
Tell me, do you discipline your children with a chainsaw too?
Raging Bee
April 4, 2012 at 3:03 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Lemme guess…SteveOR is on another drinking-and-hating binge…
Not *all* criticism of Israel is anti-semitic but a hell of a lot of it – almost all in fact – *is*.
Sorry, moron, but replacing one obvious lie with another, slightly-more-plausible-sounding lie, doesn’t make you look more intelligent. You still have an anger-management problem, and it’s still obvious.
Also, I notice the angry drunk’s only bedfellow, the #1 Likudnik Chickenhawk, has nothing to offer a grownup debate but the most simpleminded fake-folksy-wisdomy sayings, which he relentlessly repeats because he’s clearly too developmentally stunted to handle anything else. There’s really no point in arguing with such a sadistic retarded bigot: as long as he’s in a safe place that won’t be affected by the policies he advocates, he’ll never make the effort to think like a grownup.
Raging Bee
April 4, 2012 at 3:06 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
BTW, Chickenhawk, weren’t you corrected about the megatonnage you advocate in the last thread on this subject? The fact that you ignored even that minor technical correction proves you’re incapable of engaging in an adult conversation.
slc1
April 4, 2012 at 3:52 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re Raging Bee @ #68
As I stated, bombs of that size can be rapidly assembled for use against Iran.
Re Quantum Mechanic @ #66
Just for the information of Mr. Mechanic, Mecca (and Medina) is located in Saudi Arabia, not Iran.
Ray Ingles
April 4, 2012 at 5:39 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
slc1 – If you have a point, you’re going to need to unpack it explicitly…
Quantum Mechanic
April 4, 2012 at 6:01 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Ah, brain-fart. Still, the other points stand. In fact, the religious war point still stands. Jews (with a smattering of Christians) nuking millions of Muslims is going to breed a whole lot of mujahideen. Are you planning on giving every country you don’t like the same treatment?
Assembled… using which design, pray tell? Hell, the largest they have, if memory serves, is a handful of 1 megaton weapons and I doubt the US is going to hand Israel legacy high-yield designs. Even if they did, using Castle Bravo as a template? That sucker was a monster, fallout-wise. So, again what about poisoning everyone in the region?
Quantum Mechanic
April 4, 2012 at 6:25 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
His point is that he doesn’t like those noisy Arabs getting in Israel’s way, and he’s too lazy and impatient to look for an answer to the problem that won’t drown the Middle East in blood. He’d rather kill them all and let God sort ‘em out. Palestine, Iran, Every. Freakin’. Time. Because, you know, it’s not like he’s talking about PEOPLE or anything. They’re like eggs, remember, not good yolks like us; they should have sucked it up and had harder shells! They’re just subhuman, faceless, foreigner peasants, and a single Israeli civilian is worth THOUSANDS of those.
That about sum it up? Or should I have thrown something in about “the ends justifying the means”?
slc1
April 4, 2012 at 7:54 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re Quantum Mechanic @ #71
The B52 was capable of carrying four 15 megaton bombs which we had in the arsenal at one time. According to links posted by Raging Bee, among others, all of them have been dismantled. However, the technology to make some more still exists and a half dozen could be assembled relatively quickly.
Giving one to Israel would be an exercise in futility. Israel does not have an aircraft capable of delivering such a bomb. In fact, AFAIK, the B52 is the only aircraft in the US arsenal capable of delivering it. The only other aircraft capable of delivering it is the Russian Bison; I don’t know if the Russians still have any operational in their air force.
Quantum Mechanic
April 4, 2012 at 10:42 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
SLC1 @ 73:
… So it’s the US you’d want to do it, then, not even Israel itself? One nation destroying a second nation, at the beck and call of a third nation? I’m not sure if I find that more appalling or the same. It certainly isn’t less.
But screw the delivery methods; the fact that you are spending time and effort on the fantasy (including fine, nuanced details), is particularly disturbing. That strikes me as particularly sick, by the way; not unlike a man spending his days off cleaning a pistol whilst fantasizing how he’s going to kill his boss.
Hell, you’re arguing with people like Raging Bee and Dingo Jack about the feasibility of your personal favorite specific WAY of killing all of those civilians. Yes, B52 with legacy 15Mt, that’s nice. I don’t fucking care, because it’s not the fine details of what geographic coordinates you want to bomb that we’re objecting to. We’re objecting to your monstrous tendencies of indulging in public wetdreams about killing thousands to MILLIONS of civilians because you don’t like their government or the way their mother dresses them.
Really, the only question I want to hear you answer is:
What did they do with your morality after it was surgically removed?
dingojack
April 4, 2012 at 11:18 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
SLC – For your information
A)
Source Myasishchev M-4 NATO designation “BISON”.
B)
Source B28 nuclear bomb Wikipedia. (The only kind of nuclear bomb associated with the B52 I could find).
Dingo
dingojack
April 4, 2012 at 11:20 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
When and why the Nuclear B52 program stopped.
Dingo
dingojack
April 4, 2012 at 11:30 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Another problem with using B52′s:
Source Boeing B-52 Stratofortress Wikipedia.
Dingo
dogmeat
April 4, 2012 at 11:53 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
The question I have is really quite simple…
Why is it a horrific, monstrous event when the Nazis slaughtered twelve million innocent people, which it most certainly was, but it is a “reasonable” solution to the “Iranian problem” to do so to twelve million equally innocent Iranians?
How do you accomplish the cognitive, not to mention the moral, gymnastics necessary to even entertain the sick joke of such a suggestion let alone seriously propose such a thing?
StevoR
April 5, 2012 at 3:08 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@52. StevoR (me) : D’oh! Don’t you hate it when you get too rushed coz you have to race off to work and don’t have time to preview properly and then it turns out there’s an italics fail and typos in what you thought was okay to click the ‘submit comment’ button for? Sorry folks. Sigh.
@65. slc1 :
Well, that is probably overkill given that some “Daisy-cutter” (fuel-air bombs) and conventional incendiaries should suffice. No radiation but job that needs doing done.
(BTW. If folks don’t know how effective those can be look up the Dresden & Tokyo firebombings in WWII. Also remember what the sides that were bombed stood for & were. Yes, war is flippin’ nasty but, yes, you *definitely* want your side, the right side, to win.)
A Daisycutter bomb on Tehran and a few more on the Iranian military forces and nuclear sites – plus a lot of bunker busters where needed ought to work okay. A decapitation strike on the Iranian leadership, military and main nuke facilities would be my personal basic plan.
Plus maybe taking out Gaza, Ramallah and Hizbollah with uber-extreme predjudice simultaneously to prevent retaliation & telling all Muslims globally that Mecca & Medina are hostage to our whim with the serious nukes at our disposal and they need to cut their antiSemitic shit straightaway or lose those places and we durn well mean that (they have no qualms about taking hostage so, sod it, & sod them, tit-for tat) – works for me.
But I’m sure Israel’s leaders know what they’re doing and I’m sure they’re not dumb enough to believe in the sort of appeasement nonsense that other less realistic, less intelligent fools do. I’m sure the Israelis will do the right thing.
Even if the foolish side of the West doesn’t recognise it at the time. Remember how Israel took out Osirak, Iraq and Syria’s nuclear reactor under construction? Glad they’re not working now aren’t we? Say “Thankyou Israel” now if you have any common sense and integrity please.
I look forward to Israel taking out Iran too as I fully expect they will. And when they do then all you pro-Jihadists Judeaophobic anti-Semites out there please remember that I told you so and told you to suck shit! :-P
@58.Ray Ingles :
Jew hating bigots would still hate Jews.
Wherever they were. Whoever used to live there, whatever they did and however reasonable and good their actions were.
Jew hating bigots would still hate Jews.
I hope you aren’t one of those.
Please try not to be and think about that.
StevoR
April 5, 2012 at 3:33 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@78.dogmeat says:
My answer would be that “equally innocent Iranains” is actually the sick joke.
Iranians are currently brainwashed from birth to call the USA the “Great Satan” and Israel the “Lesser Satan.” To publicly call & chant for the deaths of, well, pretty much everyone who ain’t them.
They are brain-washed into beleiving a whole lot of evil shit and they act accordingly.
It may not be their fault. The average .. hmm ..let’s see .. Leninist-Stalinist Bolshevik or Maoist or whackjob cult member .. is probably equally “innnocent” and I’m sure you can provide a few other obvious examples yourself.
But people brain-washed into believeing evil shit and doing evil unto others need to stopped because what they do is, well, evil evil harmful murderous shit.
I’m sure given a decent education and freed from the very shit and rubbish and messed up crap that is Shiiite Jihadist Islam the average Irainian (like the average antiSemite for other reasons) would be an okay human being.
But because of their brain-wasjing, they ain’t -and they need to stopped before they harm others. That’s really it. Full stop.
Take out Iran and we do the whole world a favour – including what’s left of the Iranians who are freed of a monstrous ideology and leadership. They’ll recover given time and proper understanding once they’ve been defeated enough to realise that Islam is, well, shit. Evil, harmful, murderous excrement.
I think the great mistake that Bush II made post 9-11 was in failing to comprehend that Islam had declared war on everyone else and needed to be fought and unconditionally deafeated as such. Every mosque in Afghanistamn and Iraq should have been levelled and every victory should have been followed by official statements that Allah is a BS useless, non-existent sky fairy, Mohammad was a lying, child molesting, criminal thug and its time to convert to anything else esp. atheism.
The world – & those living in it and under it – very badly needs de-islamicising. Full stop.
StevoR
April 5, 2012 at 5:05 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@67. Raging Bee :
Actually Raging Bee I’m usually a happy drunk and .., oh wait, yeah, I do have an alcohol problem – my beer is empty! ;-)
(Goes to the fridge and cracks another can.) Alcohol problem fixed. ;-)
Oh & BTW. You mispelled my username – its StevoR, ‘k?
So, how does it feel to be outwitted by someone who can argue better drunk than you can sober, Raging Bee? :-P
@66.Quantum Mechanic asked :
Sadly, that’s war.
Iranians are the enemy – by *their* choice not ours.
Very few of them are truly “innocent” and, well, if I was Iranian and didn’t want to be wiped out – for very good reasons – I’d be fighting against their current crazy dictatorship with everything I had, holding nought back, that or moving countries – pronto.
Israel and the USA don’t even need nukes to take Iran out as already noted above.
But if they did use nukes on Iran then they’d be justified in doing so given the threat Iran poses to the whole world.
Are you really so …*&*&%*!@#@! .. that you haven’t noticed we’re already *in* a religious war that the late, unlamented, (‘Least by me, dude) Osama bin Laden started on September the 11th 2001? Really?!?
Yes, Islam is at war with us. They started it. Let’s finish it – as soon and as decisively as possible. ‘K?
Nearly the whole world? Ya Reckon?
There’s a truckload of anti-Semites and haters of Western civilisation out there but do you genuinely think its *that* much? Or that it matters?
Stuff that. Sod them.
Pax Americana time just like pax Romana & pax Britannia before that.
The USA is the leader of the free world. US culture and civilisation has a hell of a lot in its favour – and, btw., I’m an Aussie not a yank. I do believe in Western values and Western civilisation – don’t you? Time America (United States thereof) asserted itself properly and stopped being so apologetic and ashamed of itself and its role inthe world. I never thought I’d need or have todsy thus but Americans need to get more patriotic and more assertive ofthemselves globally
Hyperbole there much? Misunderstanding and failure on your part to comprehend reality there much? I think so.
Iran is presently the worst threat to global peace there is.
It needs taking out.
That’s the reality.
Whether you, personally, like or accept that truism or not.
@56. KG:
What the bleeding frak is your problem, imbecile?
SLC1 there is completely 1000% correct when xe says :
Self-defense.
Exactly what about that don’t you get, you anti-Semite you?
Do you even flippn’ know who Hamas are and what they want to do and seek? Or do you just not care?
Do you accept that Jewish people, Jewish individuals, Israeli ones are human and their lives are worth as much as non-jews or not!?
Simple yes or no answer please you worthless anti-Semitic, Judaeophobic sack of feces! Oh & do try to be honest & dotry to actually think – I know you owe Israel and its supporters an apology douchebag. Whether you are aware of that and mentally able to behave like a decent human being or not.
Chris from Europe
April 5, 2012 at 5:13 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Throwing baseless insults won’t convince anyone, especially when you are a genocidal bigot that parrots Pamela Geller.
Nobody here doesn’t accept that. What you don’t get, quite obviously, is that Muslims are human beings, too.
It’s not the other people here who are the problem. You are the one who is delusional.
Michael Heath
April 5, 2012 at 5:29 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
StevoR concludes:
Thanks for the blatant tell; which reveals that at some level, even you concede your absurd argument is indefensible. E.g., your mischaracterization of the attributes of the Iranian people.
dingojack
April 5, 2012 at 6:24 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Stevo – You don’t really know much about Iran (or the Middle East generally) do you?
I’d suggest a brief look at some concise histories first before coming out with gems like: “we’re already *in* a religious war that the late, unlamented, (‘Least by me, dude) Osama bin Laden started on September the 11th 2001″ and “They [Muslims] started it. Let’s finish it – as soon and as decisively as possible”. Umm – the problem has been going on for a lot longer than that.
Which is also leads one to ask: ‘What, are we four now?’.
It doesn’t matter in the least who ‘started’ it. Finding a solution that isn’t worse than problem we’re trying to solve would be a good approach, don’t you think*?
Dingo
—–
* Remember the ‘Easter Accords’?
Quantum Mechanic
April 5, 2012 at 11:00 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Fools have always turned to to violence as an answer they could understand to complicated problems. Unfortunately, you can’t always cut the Gordian Knot.
StevoR: What PRECISELY did I say that was hyperbole? The effectively irrelevant bit at the end about chainsaws? Or are you disputing that Ahmadinejad enjoys his petty luxuries too much to strap on a bomb and hitch-hike his way to Israel? You ever notice how it’s never the IMAMS driving the car-bombs?
Also, how are you NOT a mirror image of the people on the other side you so despise? “Americans/Iranians chose to be our enemies, so they must all die!” Hell, I’d say they’re more civilized than you are: THEY’RE not proposing to kill every man, woman, child, and STRAY DOG like you two are.
And, of course, Pax Americana comes up. It’s always nice to see someone openly admit they support “Might makes right”. However, it’s funny how quickly tunes change when might deserts them.
Chiroptera
April 5, 2012 at 11:18 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
StevoR, #81:
Very few of them are truly “innocent” and, well, if I was Iranian and didn’t want to be wiped out – for very good reasons – I’d be fighting against their current crazy dictatorship with everything I had, holding nought back, that or moving countries – pronto.
That, I believe, was the justification of Islamicist terrorists when they kill innocent civilians. In fact, it’s pretty much a justification of terrorists everywhere.
-
SLC1 there is completely 1000% correct when xe says :
Killing terrorists is not mass murder. It’s justifiable homicide.
We’re not talking about terrorists. We’re talking about innocent civilians, including children.
Oh, yeah, anyone who isn’t actively taking part in a civil war against their government is a terrorist.
dogmeat
April 5, 2012 at 8:25 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I hate to break this to you, but like most drunks you grossly overestimate your wit.
First, your historic hindsight is, at best, 20/400, you need some serious past glasses. Both of the pax’s you mention are artificial historic creations that don’t really reflect reality and involved choices that had catastrophic consequences for both countries when they came to an “end.” In both cases numerous wars were fought overseas, on the fringes and frontiers of these entities; the “peace” was entirely fraudulent. In the case of Rome the “peace” came at the cost of increasing economic instability and resulted in the hiring of mercenaries (Blackwater/Xe anyone?) followed by the complete collapse and a regional instability that lasted for centuries. As for Britain, the empire was involved in numerous conflicts all over the world, increasing economic instability, and reduced quality of life for the citizenry both at home and abroad.
Second, you ignore history, both decades of conflict as well as recent events that make your arguments utterly ridiculous. Iran has legitimate historical disputes with the United States, because Israel is an ally of the United States, they have equally logical reasons for potential conflict with Israel. Their rhetoric is insane, but then so is yours, so you’re hardly justified in your condemnation. In addition, as we saw in ’09, significant segments of the Iranian population oppose the current leadership of the country. The rebellions in that year were rather violently put down. You would condemn people to death for failing to overthrow their government without providing any assistance (or even recognition) of their efforts or desire.
Finally, you’re lumping millions of people into one racial, ethnic, and religious stereotype which, to anyone who knows anything about the region, is a cartoon construct that has nothing to do with the actual people of the region. Really, you should refrain from making massive, dynamic policy arguments when you don’t know what you’re talking about. The fact that your “plan” involves millions of innocent lives that you wave away as if they are not simply justified but desired suggests that you don’t understand humans or human nature and also have some serious psychological limitations.
The disturbing thing is, you (and your “chum”) are channeling the same arguments that the perpetrators of the holocaust used to justify their acts. The sub-human arguments, the stereotypical broad stroke painting of all members of the group as “threats,” the justification of force, aggressive action, and genocide to solve a vague “problem” that boils down to people you don’t like existing… sad really.
Raging Bee
April 6, 2012 at 2:31 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
My answer would be that “equally innocent Iranains” is actually the sick joke. Iranians are currently brainwashed from birth…
So it’s okay to indiscriminately slaughter Iranians by the millions because they’re brainwashed? I guess that means it’s okay to slaughter white fundagelical Christians in “flyover country” too, starting with the kids in “Jesus Camps,” right?
No matter how much trolling you do, you’re still an ignorant genocidal racist sack of shit, who clearly doesn’t take any time to think before he spews.