I'm not at all anxious to see American troops on the ground there. The carrier groups, if used as an effective deterrent to escalation, should just come home after a while. Hope to see that.
Carriers in modern war present day are sitting ducks and we all know this so I pray for the sailor on the Gerald Ford big ship there sitting duck and I wonder why it is there in the first place.
Hypersonic missiles will sink a carrier in one shot and there is no defense for this, so if that big ship gets sunk know this - it was planned in advance - sailors be damned I reckon is what they think.
I’ve thought the exact same thing for a long time. In this day and age, a carrier in a dangerous location like the Persian Gulf is just begging to be taken out. And isn’t that just exactly what the neocon war mongers are hoping for? What else could we do but go to war when the pride of our fleet and 5000 sailors are sitting at the bottom of the ocean! And woe be to he who calls for a reasoned response!
We hold every card against Hamas, they're surrounded by our capable friends, and no one is coming to save them.
In addition, US forces are more than capable of feeding the residents of Gaza and powering their grid, and we can guarantee the safety of their civilians against any Israeli attack or advantage seeking.
The level of security required to prevent the development (or importation) of offensive strike capability within a population of 2.2 million would be breathtaking both in scope and cost.
Further, Gazans don’t WANT to be protected from Israeli strikes. They want to kill the Jews. If offered the ability to make the Jews disappear in a puff of smoke (offensive reference intentional) provided that the majority of Gazans voted “yes,” what do you think the Yes vote % would be? 90%? 95%? 100%?
Its an occupation, not a poll. Heavily policing them in order to stop them from acting out their antisemitic tendencies is part of the deal. And part of the point is that we can do this much more effectively than Israel could ever dream of doing.
When you hear "occupation", you think regular patrols and squads searching homes. An occupying force, in the sense that we normally understand it, will have no need to prepare for ground invasion because they're already there.
When its said that Israel is occupying Gaza, the reality is that they're just blockading them and rendering them geopolitically ineffective. But that still leaves room for rocket attacks out of apartments, and produces the rubble and starvation that terrorist groups can use as an excuse for more terrorism.
And, in the extremely unlikely case that 2.2 million people are all so warped that they want to die, Well then... That would be their fault.
I used the hypothetical of a vote to make the point that Gazans would gladly kill all 9.7M Israelis if they possibly could. Essentially, we’re talking a maximum security prison for 2.3M inmates who’re desperate to kill everyone between them & the Jordan River.
If you think Milley’s & Austin’s woke freak show in the military is hurting recruiting, then the prospect of being a prison guard wil absolutely kill it.
What does the US get out of it? We will probably take in a bunch of refugees, many of whom will be criminals in the States. The Jews and Dispensationalists in power positions in the US will get a kick out of stomping on Hamas, at least. We may lose a few good American farm boys. Will any American soldiers get land in Gaza to settle on? Gold? Palestinian war brides? What is in it for them?
What an irritating and atavistic line of questioning.
That refugee part especially displays a serious lack of faith, and can I point out the irony in fearing the influx of their criminals while thinking thats rights to their women is a reward?
But, alright. I'll admit, US troops likely won't get much from occupation of that area, as its military has long abandoned the business of acting towards those ends. So, really, you're asking what I think they should have.
1) How about no taxation of any kind on the participating troops for 10 years.
2) Citizenship for any woman they happen to marry over there.
3) And to seize and keep the property and assets of, and any souveniers from, any confirmed member of Hamas leadership. Something to bring home to the kids.
As for the Nation, the benefits to be gained from sustaining and protecting Gaza will be abstract, or unnatural.
1) The media's grip gets a little weaker with less to report on.
2) A slightly reduced long term need to send aid to Israel.
3) Credit for both helping Israel and ending the repeated devastation in Gaza. As well as a chance to do some reformation of the population into something more ... economically skilled and less Islamist. (What do Japan, Ireland, and Taiwan have in common? Few natural resources.)
No irony. Men and women are different, particularly as regards likelihood of violent criminality. Taking in female war brides (or refugees) is a much different prospect from taking in fighting age male refugees, which recent events show are a significant portion of so called asylum seekers.
No, pompous would be saying, "We'll finish this by Christmas."
All one needs to do is notice the Mediterranian sea, take a note of which countries are around there, see which of those groups would try to interfere, and notice that Gaza is the size of an east coast city. To say the advantage is on the US's side is a realistic assessment.
How many times and on how many threads have you posted the same comment? Does "David Cashion" actually have something substantial to add to this conversation or is this account a bot?
If you are advocating for the US to go on a genocidal crusade to exterminate all Mohammadans and to distribute their lands, property, and attractive women to American warriors then I would support it wholeheartedly, though that is not exactly feasible in the current political and social environment.
If you are advocating that we send Americans to die helping the foreign tribe of Israeli Jews in their ethnic squabble with the rival foreign tribe of Palestinian Mohammadans with little gain in store for the American people then I categorically say "Nope."
You are either utterly ignorant of how Islam administers it's non-Muslim population, or you're being flagrantly dishonest.
Or both, perhaps - but definitely not neither.
I'm an atheist - so from my perspective all three of the Abrahamic cults are just cosplay for retards.
However only TWO of them have "Kill everything that breatheth" in their foundational literature.
The third enjoins its fighters using words uttered by the first Caliph - Abu Bakr, father-in-law to Mohammed, and a man that Mohammed gave the designation "the Righteous".
Here's how Abu Bakr said that Muslim warfighters should comport themselves:
==================================
“Stop, O people, that I may give you ten rules for guidance on the battlefield. Do not commit treachery or deviate from the right path. You must not mutilate dead bodies; do not kill a woman, a child, or an aged man; do not cut down fruitful trees; do not destroy inhabited areas; do not slaughter any of the enemies’ sheep, cow or camel except for food; do not burn date palms, nor inundate them; do not embezzle* nor be guilty of cowardliness…You are likely to pass by people who have devoted their lives to monastic services; leave them alone.”
==================================
Now compare that with the bloodthirsty bilge in 1 Samuel 15:2-3:
==================================
This is what the Lord Almighty says: ‘I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’
==================================
Or perhaps Deuteronomy 20:16-17
==================================
However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you.
==================================
If you hear about jihadi behaving in a very "Old Testament", "Kill 'em all" kind of way... they're apostates.
But Jews and Christians who do the same thing - those guys are genuinely following their cult's doctrines.
If you want some idea abut who is comfortable killing babies: Hosea 13:16 gives you a clue -
==================================
The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open.”
The good books are full are harm hateful are they not?
Now - it must be a matter of interpretation the good book lovers proclaim while more and more innocence is led to death....and really why so much affinity for these books a rationale mind can't help but ponder - I suppose it is a matter of interpretation, but if justification is being sought for harm upon innocence, then no doubt there is plenty of backup for that in the good books.
I don't blame the books - I think the readers are confused.
You're being far too lenient on both 'the books' and 'the readers'.
The 'books' (the Torah; the Talmud; the Old Testament; the New Testament; and the Qu'ran) are ludicrous anthologies of primitive drivel that are objectively wrong in all salient particulars of the periods and events they purport to describe.
I hold that there is nothing wrong if a book contains stupid bullshit - so long as everyone who reads the book in question starts from that premise. It goes against my deepest principles to ban any book, regardless of its content. Even if a book full of absolute wild-eyed bullshit has, within its pages, the claim that its contents are unalloyed Truth... such a book cannot do any harm in and of itself.
The 'readers', though: that group will include some sociopaths who have their eye on the main chance. They will attempt to set themselves up as the sole authoritative source of interpretation of the text, and if they succeed shit gets sideways real quick. Let's call that clique 'the guardians of the books'.
'The readers' were not permitted to read the unexpurgated text of 'the books' for over a millennium; the 'guardians of the books' were prone to get a tad 'mediaeval' on people who tried to publish native-language versions of 'the books'.
For translating the Bible into 'the vernacular':
--- Wycliffe was anathemised, his remains dug up and burnt,
and the ashes scattered;
--- Tyndale was found guilty of heresy, ritually-strangled and his body burnt at the stake.
'The books' retain their popularity because the stories they contain are foisted on young minds while they are still impressionable - but unlike other lies that parents tell their kids (about Santa, the Easter Bunny, or the Tooth Fairy), there is never a point in life where people in authority tell the kids that it's just bullshit.
Some of us reach our sixth or seventh year, still believing in a Rabbit bearing Chocolate Eggs, or in an obese bearded dude delivering gifts.
I consider myself fortunate: for as long as I can remember, my parents made it clear that presents and rewards came from them (and other adults) and that the stories were just stories.
Oh - so you only read what satisfies your mind and is popular - I mean really that response in a debate fair will get you nowhere. It suggests you don't have the guts to read that which doesn't affirm your bias.
Don’t we wish they was the case. Their very religion demands you convert, become a slave and pay a duty, or death. As Westerners, it’s hard for us to comprehend that way of life, so we just change the meaning and make it that the radicals are the ones who’re wanting to kill everyone, convert them, or make slaves of everyone. They won’t stop until all the known world is Islam.
I can't concur with this because to be an observer is to be a non-participant and this seems to be the epitome in the modern times of a struggle twixt the state versus the population in place - both indigenous and the ones there now....
the "state" could give a shit about the citizens - all the state wants is more central power and authority and history may repeat and it does mostly, but it is a spiral and this spiral is close to being totally out of control and that may be by design, but philosophically the "forest walker" (See By Ernst Jünger for this - https://www.telospress.com/store/The-Forest-Passage-paperback-p30633407) walks in the woods and knows their vote does not matter and knows that the power of the "state" will NEVER be stronger than the power from a single individual going through the forest passage.
So to sit idle while others suffer so, is only kicking the can down the road and that eventually results in a moment when the road ends.
I make typos all the time...they add to the flavor in a way...
This is a great article I intend on studying closely and maybe digging a bit deeper being I had family in the area during the time (or maybe the generation that followed)....in fact, a little side-story but who was that Mejican fella - Pancho Villa I think - he came to my great-granddaddy's candy store in Arizona after my great-granddaddy was crippled in the Cripple Creek area of Colorado if memory serves in one of the many railroad worker accidents....tis a small world if you think about it and appreciate history.
I think this when he came into my grand-daddy's store and rumor is my grand-dad witnessed it in silence - from the link:
~
Villa escaped on Christmas Day 1912, crossing into the United States near Nogales, Arizona on 2 January 1913.
If SubStack does this, whatever the entity of it is, that would be a mistake on their end - would it not?
As in investor, I have standing to state that and as an Author I do as well, so I sure hope it ain't happening cause if it is, then there is easy evidence on that and I don't think it is, but if it is - it could be it ain't SubStack....and then the web goes more convoluted I reckon so prove it if you can.
One thing I keep hearing about is how Israel is continually committing “genocide” upon Palestinians. Im no math wizard or expert on historical definitions, but It seems to me that if the Israelis really were committing genocide, the population of Gaza wouldn’t be higher now than it had been previously.
To put some numbers to it, in 1950, there were 204K ppl in Gaza. Today, it’s 2.23M, for an annual growth rate of 11.3%, an unprecedented number for such an extended period. But we shouldn’t be surprised – with the blockade, the suicide bombers are stuck at home with nothing to do but mounting up on their unlucky wives.
When I was in prison I tried to make friends but the alone time there is deadly and so I'm glad it wasn't long before I got out. Prison sucks and prison guards out of Israel they must be wondering whether the ideology of zionism is fated for death - I think it is.
I have been to Israel. Met Arab and Jewish folks. Ate in their restaurants, shopped in their stores. In many or most cases it wasn't readily observable what the ethnicity. Palestine has always had Jewish as well as Arab population for over 2000 years. Arab population makes up about 17% of Israel. They are citizens, can own property, can vote, some get elected to parliament, some serve in the IDF. These are details not widely shared by the MSM.
Like your comment, but disagree on the overlap of cohabitation. The Jews were there at least by 2000 BC, while the Muslims only arrived in 636 AD to lay siege to Jerusalem.
The so-called president of the so-called Palestinian so-called Authority (have I hit my character limit yet?) hasn't stood for election since... wait for it... January 2005. He's about to start year 20 of his four-year term. And the last election before that took place in 1996 (Arafat--hock, ptui!--won.) No offense to a fine people, but Arabs don't do democracy. And the Gaza Arabs don't do decency. Or humanity. But if you want a savage interloper to slaughter an indigenous population, you can't beat the Arabs against the Jews. Actually, you can beat them, and should. Like a rented mule.
CJ has a math problem. And I told him so. About a million Palestinian Arabs in the Palestinian Mandate before 1948. About 7 million now - 2 million in Israel, 3 million in the West Bank, 2 million in Gaza. Seems like a very poorly carried out “ethnic cleansing” job if you go by the math. Libs like the narrative, not the facts which are as you say more complicated in reality.,
They eradicate them with free healthcare for wounded terrorists, warning pamphlets air dropped to allow them to evacuate, and knock on the roof dud bombs so they can escape buildings before destruction. These methods are traditionally used to eradicate ethnic groups.
I’m not worried at all because our fearless leader is arriving in country tomorrow to straighten out this 3000 plus year old dispute. I’m sure it will be doves and sunshine with his great leadership. He will do for them what he has done here in the United States!
If Israel is able to destroy Hamas in Gaza they will have done the Palestinian people a great service. Whether the Palestinians then will be smart enough to take advantage of their first chance at self-rule since 2006 is another matter entirely.
The residents of Gaza had the same choice in 2006, and gave away their freedom for 17 yrs. It’s been fairly clear that Muslim peoples are largely incapable of self-government. Democracy dies on the vine b/c of disinterest. They have strong tribal instincts, which result in monarchical or strongman governments. The idea of political coordination is a nonstarter. As a society, they are reminiscent of crabs. When fishing for crabs, you only need a lid on the basket for the first one. Once there are 2, an interesting phenomenon presents itself: As one crab starts to crawl up the side to escape, the other crab will reach up and pull the first one down. No need for a lid. So to with the Muslim peoples in the Levant & south central Asia. Perhaps it’s the rampant fundamentalism there. The members of the GCC and the Muslim countries in Southeast Asia are far from the fundamentalists and seem far more functional as societies.
Let’s not forget that the “Muslim peoples“ means Muslim men. I can guarantee you that if women were in charge it would be a whole friggin different story.
But apparently they never will be.
As to your geographical distinction, perhaps in one place it’s a religion, and in the other place it’s what they are - chapter and verse.
What is astonishing to me is that they hate so thoroughly and completely and seemingly unendingly. If they didn’t have Jews to hate, and plot against and kill they’d be hating and killing somebody else. Like us -- the great Satan.
Muslim women are totally in charge of their households, including Muslim boys up to the age of puberty. The ones in the Middle East (as opposed to say, Indonesia) are as totally committed to jihad against Israel and the West, as well as against Shia or Sunni as their religion/tribe warrants, as their menfolk. They are all raised from birth to believe the same things, and the women are often the most zealous, more so than the men. They raise their children for jihad and to be martyrs. I do agree with the rest of your comment, but I don't believe anything would change if the women were in charge. It might even get worse.
Apparently the internecine conflict between Muslim and Jewish Palestinians began between 1904 and 1914 as a result of the 2nd Aliyah in which 35K Jews emigrated from Eastern Europe to Palestine. (This was part of the emigration of 2M Jews from Eastern Europe from 1870 to the 1920s.) Things really went downhill in 1920 when the British Mandate for Palestine incorporated the Balfour Declaration which supported a "national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine. It did not help that the Jews arriving in Palestine were infused with Zionism, which envisioned a Jewish culture, economy and government of which the Arabs would be an ancillary part. The armed conflict between Arabs and Jews began that year and has never stopped.
You can destroy Hamas, but if 2.3 million Palestinians remain virtual prisoners in the Gaza strip, another Hamas will soon be on the scene. A permanent solution is needed...I don’t know what that would look like, but a Gaza POW camp isn’t it.
Israel has taken in millions of Jews over the years that were oppressed and forced to flee Muslim countries. No Muslim countries have done the same with the so-called Palestinians. This is a purely political decision and also one of self-preservation for those Muslim countries. Jordan got a taste of this and had to ruthlessly put their Palestinian refugee population down in the '70s, just as, if not more ruthlessly than anything the Israelis have done up to this point. Palestinians are despised by the other Muslim societies.
This was very insightful, thanks. And you managed to do it without curling your lip and sneering at a large proportion of your readers (CJ Hopkins, will you please take note?).
I listened to a discussion this afternoon with a British journalist who is aJew who has followed this for 20+ years and has educated herself on the history after initially being ignorant of the background. Summary of her exposition of the history:
1. There have always been Jews in Israel (well, since Moses brought them out of Egypt to the land promised to Abram/Abraham & his descendants--accepted history by the 3 Abrahamic religions, but not by anyone else).
2. For a brief moment in time they were an independent nation/kingdom but have subsequently been conquered, exiled, repatriated, rinse and repeat, but with a remnant remaining: Assyrian, Babylonian, Medical-Persian, Greek, Roman, Ottoman... I may have missed a few (The Romans imposed the name Palestine on the region after they wiped out the Jewish rebellion that led to the destruction of the last Temple, cause they didn’t want to deal with the Jews any more, I guess)
3. WWI did in the Turkish Ottoman Empire, France & Britain divided up the Mideast under League of Nations mandate, the British getting ‘Palestine’. Clause in mandate stipulated that the Jews should be able to & encouraged to return & settle. At that time the countryside was sparsely populated with nomadic tribes (Bedouin, & others ) & Jews were the largest group in Jerusalem.
4. The Brits were reluctant to hostile to the return part of the mandate & IIRC encouraged Arabs to move in while Jews were migrating, & eventually there developed a bloody 3 sided war: Arab v Jew v Brit, which after WWII the Brits were tired of & handed the still in force League of Nations mandate (though honored more in the breach than observation ) to the UN to supervise. The original L o N mandate was for all of Palestine to become Jewish Israel, but the Brits sabotaged that by inviting the Arabs in leading to the ongoing conflict.
5. 1948 was supposed to be the birth of Israel, but the surrounding Arabs had other thoughts & invaded Israel. However, unexpectedly the Israelis won. Unfortunately, the land was partitioned roughly as it is today.
Surrounding Arab countries refused to allow the Palestinian Arabs to settle in their countries & still do, & maintain hostile to Israel, with notable exceptions.
Since 1948 I understand that both I & P (possibly to a lesser extent)have stoked the fire with false flag incidents in the hopes of an ultimate victory for their side.
That summary by the erudite British Jewess journalist (apologizes to her for any inaccuracies in my summary of her summary) fits well with what I recall from my schooling, knowledge of Biblical & ancient history, my contemporaneous reading in my younger days, and my time in Kurdistan after the 2nd Gulf war.
A mess, no one is without blood on their hands & no one is telling the truth, the whole truth & nothing but the truth ( including me).
The more that this column sits in my head, Chris, the more that it hits me as one of the most, nuanced articulate takes on a nasty issue. Neither side in this conflict has covered themselves in glory but the fact that the Israelis are being considerate of the big picture is pretty evident. Hopefully the Israelis toss Bibi and gun control in the trash. Frankly I just want us to stay out of this.
From your lips to God's ears. I was shocked to find out how bad Israeli gun control was. My assumption was they had something similar to the Swiss. It's not like any of their neighbors are friends.
Israel attempted to set up a two state peaceful situation in 1948 after partition. The Arabs refused and went to war. No Arab country would accept the resulting war refugees so they were relegated to Gaza along with Jews already living there. The Arabs continued fighting Israel using Gaza as a pretext for war. Israel has since offered a two state solution and been rebuffed.
This is a fight for existence on Israel's part and a continuing war of genocide on the part of the Arabs. If Israel surrenders, they die.
This seems like selective memory of history and if you say a peaceful situation was proffered then it must not have been made in good faith cause look at what has happened since 1948. I think you statement is hogwash.
I also think the whole 2-state solution is not workable and recent times seem to suggest that is the case. But maybe a 3-state solution would work....problem is nobody is talking at the table - it is nothing but missiles, harm, innocence dying once more and nothing changing for the better. That is not sustainable.
Fact of the matter is Israel is becoming isolated - China brokered an arrangement geopolitically genius twixt Saudi Arabia and Iran and now Israel is odd-man out self inflicted. Fact hurt and Israel needs to get their house in order, but in the middle of a civil war internal - what you think the chances of that are?
Sadly, given the history of it all, the chances are slim to none and a caged trickster has nothing left to offer but the dismay they have in their own minds, so best to cage Israel in for the sake of humanity. I say that with no disrespect, but the zionist are out of bounds on this and if they plan on killing the Palestinians, then they might as well plan on killing all humanity because metaphorically speaking the prison the Palestinians are within - a definitive open air prison of millions trapped - that is what they will do for the rest of us and they will come in and wipe us out if this travesty goes to conclusion in the minds of the demented ones.
All Hallows approaches and I hope you are ready cause the shit seems to be ready to hit the fan.
Excellent historical references and using the same to explain what is occurring in real time. Given that large parts of the ground in question was populated by Jews and Christians for centuries until the Ottomans, with the help of local Muslim tribes, killed off or drove off most of the infidels from the late 1800's to the early 1020's in a genocide in the Levant and Turkey, who is indigenous and who is a settler becomes harder to distinguish. After all, Hitler pointed to that genocide as an excellent example of how to conduct one thoroughly and effectively, echoes of which are still resonating in that part of the world by the Muslims. So, what is to be done? Given the loathing all throughout the Sunni world for the Palestinians, who already have their own country, called Jordan, but can't go there because the Jordanians fear and hate them, I think there will be much blood letting in Gaza and the immediate area, but that the Shiites will restrain themselves from a wider war. What will be critical is the Israelis being able to destroy Hama as a political entity and over time, bring back the Palestinians to a sane and less violent people. After all, that is what we have done here, as you point out, by ridding ourselves of the most violent and criminal of our societies, so that saner and cooler heads can prevail.
Chris, I really appreciate your insight and knowledge of American and military history when it comes to current events. It lends a tremendous amount of insight and context to what we're currently facing.
The more I read, the more I want to stay far, far away from the entire debacle. No good can come from sticking our hands into that mess.
I'm not at all anxious to see American troops on the ground there. The carrier groups, if used as an effective deterrent to escalation, should just come home after a while. Hope to see that.
Carriers in modern war present day are sitting ducks and we all know this so I pray for the sailor on the Gerald Ford big ship there sitting duck and I wonder why it is there in the first place.
Hypersonic missiles will sink a carrier in one shot and there is no defense for this, so if that big ship gets sunk know this - it was planned in advance - sailors be damned I reckon is what they think.
I’ve thought the exact same thing for a long time. In this day and age, a carrier in a dangerous location like the Persian Gulf is just begging to be taken out. And isn’t that just exactly what the neocon war mongers are hoping for? What else could we do but go to war when the pride of our fleet and 5000 sailors are sitting at the bottom of the ocean! And woe be to he who calls for a reasoned response!
I think, why not?
We hold every card against Hamas, they're surrounded by our capable friends, and no one is coming to save them.
In addition, US forces are more than capable of feeding the residents of Gaza and powering their grid, and we can guarantee the safety of their civilians against any Israeli attack or advantage seeking.
The level of security required to prevent the development (or importation) of offensive strike capability within a population of 2.2 million would be breathtaking both in scope and cost.
Further, Gazans don’t WANT to be protected from Israeli strikes. They want to kill the Jews. If offered the ability to make the Jews disappear in a puff of smoke (offensive reference intentional) provided that the majority of Gazans voted “yes,” what do you think the Yes vote % would be? 90%? 95%? 100%?
Vote? Want?
What sort of talk is that?
Its an occupation, not a poll. Heavily policing them in order to stop them from acting out their antisemitic tendencies is part of the deal. And part of the point is that we can do this much more effectively than Israel could ever dream of doing.
When you hear "occupation", you think regular patrols and squads searching homes. An occupying force, in the sense that we normally understand it, will have no need to prepare for ground invasion because they're already there.
When its said that Israel is occupying Gaza, the reality is that they're just blockading them and rendering them geopolitically ineffective. But that still leaves room for rocket attacks out of apartments, and produces the rubble and starvation that terrorist groups can use as an excuse for more terrorism.
And, in the extremely unlikely case that 2.2 million people are all so warped that they want to die, Well then... That would be their fault.
I used the hypothetical of a vote to make the point that Gazans would gladly kill all 9.7M Israelis if they possibly could. Essentially, we’re talking a maximum security prison for 2.3M inmates who’re desperate to kill everyone between them & the Jordan River.
If you think Milley’s & Austin’s woke freak show in the military is hurting recruiting, then the prospect of being a prison guard wil absolutely kill it.
What does the US get out of it? We will probably take in a bunch of refugees, many of whom will be criminals in the States. The Jews and Dispensationalists in power positions in the US will get a kick out of stomping on Hamas, at least. We may lose a few good American farm boys. Will any American soldiers get land in Gaza to settle on? Gold? Palestinian war brides? What is in it for them?
What an irritating and atavistic line of questioning.
That refugee part especially displays a serious lack of faith, and can I point out the irony in fearing the influx of their criminals while thinking thats rights to their women is a reward?
But, alright. I'll admit, US troops likely won't get much from occupation of that area, as its military has long abandoned the business of acting towards those ends. So, really, you're asking what I think they should have.
1) How about no taxation of any kind on the participating troops for 10 years.
2) Citizenship for any woman they happen to marry over there.
3) And to seize and keep the property and assets of, and any souveniers from, any confirmed member of Hamas leadership. Something to bring home to the kids.
As for the Nation, the benefits to be gained from sustaining and protecting Gaza will be abstract, or unnatural.
1) The media's grip gets a little weaker with less to report on.
2) A slightly reduced long term need to send aid to Israel.
3) Credit for both helping Israel and ending the repeated devastation in Gaza. As well as a chance to do some reformation of the population into something more ... economically skilled and less Islamist. (What do Japan, Ireland, and Taiwan have in common? Few natural resources.)
4) Dollarization.
Atavism is a compliment.
Now you are talking on the tax and war trophy front! No taxation for life would be better though.
No irony. Men and women are different, particularly as regards likelihood of violent criminality. Taking in female war brides (or refugees) is a much different prospect from taking in fighting age male refugees, which recent events show are a significant portion of so called asylum seekers.
When you think you hold all the cards is when you lose the game - it is a pompous attitude from the get-go.
No, pompous would be saying, "We'll finish this by Christmas."
All one needs to do is notice the Mediterranian sea, take a note of which countries are around there, see which of those groups would try to interfere, and notice that Gaza is the size of an east coast city. To say the advantage is on the US's side is a realistic assessment.
Well that sounds nice.
But Islam dictates you make a choice.
Convert
Slavery
Death.
How long do you wait?
How many times and on how many threads have you posted the same comment? Does "David Cashion" actually have something substantial to add to this conversation or is this account a bot?
Do some research.
I have done quite a bit of research. I also know that reading propaganda and political talking points is not the same as doing research.
Which do u pick ?
Neither.
If you are advocating for the US to go on a genocidal crusade to exterminate all Mohammadans and to distribute their lands, property, and attractive women to American warriors then I would support it wholeheartedly, though that is not exactly feasible in the current political and social environment.
If you are advocating that we send Americans to die helping the foreign tribe of Israeli Jews in their ethnic squabble with the rival foreign tribe of Palestinian Mohammadans with little gain in store for the American people then I categorically say "Nope."
You are either utterly ignorant of how Islam administers it's non-Muslim population, or you're being flagrantly dishonest.
Or both, perhaps - but definitely not neither.
I'm an atheist - so from my perspective all three of the Abrahamic cults are just cosplay for retards.
However only TWO of them have "Kill everything that breatheth" in their foundational literature.
The third enjoins its fighters using words uttered by the first Caliph - Abu Bakr, father-in-law to Mohammed, and a man that Mohammed gave the designation "the Righteous".
Here's how Abu Bakr said that Muslim warfighters should comport themselves:
==================================
“Stop, O people, that I may give you ten rules for guidance on the battlefield. Do not commit treachery or deviate from the right path. You must not mutilate dead bodies; do not kill a woman, a child, or an aged man; do not cut down fruitful trees; do not destroy inhabited areas; do not slaughter any of the enemies’ sheep, cow or camel except for food; do not burn date palms, nor inundate them; do not embezzle* nor be guilty of cowardliness…You are likely to pass by people who have devoted their lives to monastic services; leave them alone.”
==================================
Now compare that with the bloodthirsty bilge in 1 Samuel 15:2-3:
==================================
This is what the Lord Almighty says: ‘I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’
==================================
Or perhaps Deuteronomy 20:16-17
==================================
However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you.
==================================
If you hear about jihadi behaving in a very "Old Testament", "Kill 'em all" kind of way... they're apostates.
But Jews and Christians who do the same thing - those guys are genuinely following their cult's doctrines.
If you want some idea abut who is comfortable killing babies: Hosea 13:16 gives you a clue -
==================================
The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open.”
==================================
Classy.
The good books are full are harm hateful are they not?
Now - it must be a matter of interpretation the good book lovers proclaim while more and more innocence is led to death....and really why so much affinity for these books a rationale mind can't help but ponder - I suppose it is a matter of interpretation, but if justification is being sought for harm upon innocence, then no doubt there is plenty of backup for that in the good books.
I don't blame the books - I think the readers are confused.
You're being far too lenient on both 'the books' and 'the readers'.
The 'books' (the Torah; the Talmud; the Old Testament; the New Testament; and the Qu'ran) are ludicrous anthologies of primitive drivel that are objectively wrong in all salient particulars of the periods and events they purport to describe.
I hold that there is nothing wrong if a book contains stupid bullshit - so long as everyone who reads the book in question starts from that premise. It goes against my deepest principles to ban any book, regardless of its content. Even if a book full of absolute wild-eyed bullshit has, within its pages, the claim that its contents are unalloyed Truth... such a book cannot do any harm in and of itself.
The 'readers', though: that group will include some sociopaths who have their eye on the main chance. They will attempt to set themselves up as the sole authoritative source of interpretation of the text, and if they succeed shit gets sideways real quick. Let's call that clique 'the guardians of the books'.
'The readers' were not permitted to read the unexpurgated text of 'the books' for over a millennium; the 'guardians of the books' were prone to get a tad 'mediaeval' on people who tried to publish native-language versions of 'the books'.
For translating the Bible into 'the vernacular':
--- Wycliffe was anathemised, his remains dug up and burnt,
and the ashes scattered;
--- Tyndale was found guilty of heresy, ritually-strangled and his body burnt at the stake.
'The books' retain their popularity because the stories they contain are foisted on young minds while they are still impressionable - but unlike other lies that parents tell their kids (about Santa, the Easter Bunny, or the Tooth Fairy), there is never a point in life where people in authority tell the kids that it's just bullshit.
Some of us reach our sixth or seventh year, still believing in a Rabbit bearing Chocolate Eggs, or in an obese bearded dude delivering gifts.
I consider myself fortunate: for as long as I can remember, my parents made it clear that presents and rewards came from them (and other adults) and that the stories were just stories.
Sorry I don't read long comments from no name people.
Oh - so you only read what satisfies your mind and is popular - I mean really that response in a debate fair will get you nowhere. It suggests you don't have the guts to read that which doesn't affirm your bias.
I choose option 4: Attack!
Correct, and the “radical islamists” are actually the ones who don’t want to wage holy war on everyone else.
Please enlighten.
I thought that was the definition of radical Islamists.
Don’t we wish they was the case. Their very religion demands you convert, become a slave and pay a duty, or death. As Westerners, it’s hard for us to comprehend that way of life, so we just change the meaning and make it that the radicals are the ones who’re wanting to kill everyone, convert them, or make slaves of everyone. They won’t stop until all the known world is Islam.
Yes I suspected that would be your point and I agree.
But hey you got to start somewhere.
Please read the Koran; you are incorrect.
I’m not incorrect at all. You’re incorrect and are sprinkling fairy dust in order to appease your sensibilities.
Yeah it's the forever war to end all forever wars...forever...and ever...
And that's the problem 1/3rd of all people on earth believe that to be literally gospel.
Gotta keep feeding that military-industrial complex. Nothing ever changes. :(
I can't concur with this because to be an observer is to be a non-participant and this seems to be the epitome in the modern times of a struggle twixt the state versus the population in place - both indigenous and the ones there now....
the "state" could give a shit about the citizens - all the state wants is more central power and authority and history may repeat and it does mostly, but it is a spiral and this spiral is close to being totally out of control and that may be by design, but philosophically the "forest walker" (See By Ernst Jünger for this - https://www.telospress.com/store/The-Forest-Passage-paperback-p30633407) walks in the woods and knows their vote does not matter and knows that the power of the "state" will NEVER be stronger than the power from a single individual going through the forest passage.
So to sit idle while others suffer so, is only kicking the can down the road and that eventually results in a moment when the road ends.
Typo fixed in the last paragraph, but you'll still see it in the emailed version.
I have a sneaking suspicion that Substack throws in a random typo after you hit "publish"......
No way, man. It's all me.
I make typos all the time...they add to the flavor in a way...
This is a great article I intend on studying closely and maybe digging a bit deeper being I had family in the area during the time (or maybe the generation that followed)....in fact, a little side-story but who was that Mejican fella - Pancho Villa I think - he came to my great-granddaddy's candy store in Arizona after my great-granddaddy was crippled in the Cripple Creek area of Colorado if memory serves in one of the many railroad worker accidents....tis a small world if you think about it and appreciate history.
I think this when he came into my grand-daddy's store and rumor is my grand-dad witnessed it in silence - from the link:
~
Villa escaped on Christmas Day 1912, crossing into the United States near Nogales, Arizona on 2 January 1913.
If SubStack does this, whatever the entity of it is, that would be a mistake on their end - would it not?
As in investor, I have standing to state that and as an Author I do as well, so I sure hope it ain't happening cause if it is, then there is easy evidence on that and I don't think it is, but if it is - it could be it ain't SubStack....and then the web goes more convoluted I reckon so prove it if you can.
One thing I keep hearing about is how Israel is continually committing “genocide” upon Palestinians. Im no math wizard or expert on historical definitions, but It seems to me that if the Israelis really were committing genocide, the population of Gaza wouldn’t be higher now than it had been previously.
To put some numbers to it, in 1950, there were 204K ppl in Gaza. Today, it’s 2.23M, for an annual growth rate of 11.3%, an unprecedented number for such an extended period. But we shouldn’t be surprised – with the blockade, the suicide bombers are stuck at home with nothing to do but mounting up on their unlucky wives.
I "like" that post hesitantly - it made me laugh, so I liked it!
I mean what else is there to do when in prison?
Some ppl react to prison with anger & resentment, while others adapt to their new reality. The Palestinians are strong exemplars of the former.
When I was in prison I tried to make friends but the alone time there is deadly and so I'm glad it wasn't long before I got out. Prison sucks and prison guards out of Israel they must be wondering whether the ideology of zionism is fated for death - I think it is.
Well first of all math is racist, and second of all words mean what you want them to mean - Presto!
No credit to Humpty Dumpty? 😂
Math is not racist, but statistics is.
Suggest the Israelis have no idea what they are doing and they are conflicted internally - in fact seems obvious - they are in a civil war no doubt.
Refreshing, sane; refreshingly sane -- thank you.
I have been to Israel. Met Arab and Jewish folks. Ate in their restaurants, shopped in their stores. In many or most cases it wasn't readily observable what the ethnicity. Palestine has always had Jewish as well as Arab population for over 2000 years. Arab population makes up about 17% of Israel. They are citizens, can own property, can vote, some get elected to parliament, some serve in the IDF. These are details not widely shared by the MSM.
Like your comment, but disagree on the overlap of cohabitation. The Jews were there at least by 2000 BC, while the Muslims only arrived in 636 AD to lay siege to Jerusalem.
Correct. Israel will take you in if you do indeed don’t wish harm upon their people.
The so-called president of the so-called Palestinian so-called Authority (have I hit my character limit yet?) hasn't stood for election since... wait for it... January 2005. He's about to start year 20 of his four-year term. And the last election before that took place in 1996 (Arafat--hock, ptui!--won.) No offense to a fine people, but Arabs don't do democracy. And the Gaza Arabs don't do decency. Or humanity. But if you want a savage interloper to slaughter an indigenous population, you can't beat the Arabs against the Jews. Actually, you can beat them, and should. Like a rented mule.
‘Democracy’ as we have in the West (Europe, Britain, Australia, NZ, Canada) is not something to brag about
Hey – NZ just resoundingly threw the Libs out like yesterday’s newspaper. Democracy can’t be ALL bad…
by the Uniparty
As if it will make any difference
CJ has a math problem. And I told him so. About a million Palestinian Arabs in the Palestinian Mandate before 1948. About 7 million now - 2 million in Israel, 3 million in the West Bank, 2 million in Gaza. Seems like a very poorly carried out “ethnic cleansing” job if you go by the math. Libs like the narrative, not the facts which are as you say more complicated in reality.,
This is the flag that flies over the whole discussion. The state is eradicating a people whose numbers are growing.
They eradicate them with free healthcare for wounded terrorists, warning pamphlets air dropped to allow them to evacuate, and knock on the roof dud bombs so they can escape buildings before destruction. These methods are traditionally used to eradicate ethnic groups.
I’m not worried at all because our fearless leader is arriving in country tomorrow to straighten out this 3000 plus year old dispute. I’m sure it will be doves and sunshine with his great leadership. He will do for them what he has done here in the United States!
Oh wait, might have to rethink that.
Lolol!
If Israel is able to destroy Hamas in Gaza they will have done the Palestinian people a great service. Whether the Palestinians then will be smart enough to take advantage of their first chance at self-rule since 2006 is another matter entirely.
The residents of Gaza had the same choice in 2006, and gave away their freedom for 17 yrs. It’s been fairly clear that Muslim peoples are largely incapable of self-government. Democracy dies on the vine b/c of disinterest. They have strong tribal instincts, which result in monarchical or strongman governments. The idea of political coordination is a nonstarter. As a society, they are reminiscent of crabs. When fishing for crabs, you only need a lid on the basket for the first one. Once there are 2, an interesting phenomenon presents itself: As one crab starts to crawl up the side to escape, the other crab will reach up and pull the first one down. No need for a lid. So to with the Muslim peoples in the Levant & south central Asia. Perhaps it’s the rampant fundamentalism there. The members of the GCC and the Muslim countries in Southeast Asia are far from the fundamentalists and seem far more functional as societies.
Let’s not forget that the “Muslim peoples“ means Muslim men. I can guarantee you that if women were in charge it would be a whole friggin different story.
But apparently they never will be.
As to your geographical distinction, perhaps in one place it’s a religion, and in the other place it’s what they are - chapter and verse.
What is astonishing to me is that they hate so thoroughly and completely and seemingly unendingly. If they didn’t have Jews to hate, and plot against and kill they’d be hating and killing somebody else. Like us -- the great Satan.
They are TEDIOUS.
Muslim women are totally in charge of their households, including Muslim boys up to the age of puberty. The ones in the Middle East (as opposed to say, Indonesia) are as totally committed to jihad against Israel and the West, as well as against Shia or Sunni as their religion/tribe warrants, as their menfolk. They are all raised from birth to believe the same things, and the women are often the most zealous, more so than the men. They raise their children for jihad and to be martyrs. I do agree with the rest of your comment, but I don't believe anything would change if the women were in charge. It might even get worse.
I agree on all counts.
Apparently the internecine conflict between Muslim and Jewish Palestinians began between 1904 and 1914 as a result of the 2nd Aliyah in which 35K Jews emigrated from Eastern Europe to Palestine. (This was part of the emigration of 2M Jews from Eastern Europe from 1870 to the 1920s.) Things really went downhill in 1920 when the British Mandate for Palestine incorporated the Balfour Declaration which supported a "national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine. It did not help that the Jews arriving in Palestine were infused with Zionism, which envisioned a Jewish culture, economy and government of which the Arabs would be an ancillary part. The armed conflict between Arabs and Jews began that year and has never stopped.
You can destroy Hamas, but if 2.3 million Palestinians remain virtual prisoners in the Gaza strip, another Hamas will soon be on the scene. A permanent solution is needed...I don’t know what that would look like, but a Gaza POW camp isn’t it.
Israel has taken in millions of Jews over the years that were oppressed and forced to flee Muslim countries. No Muslim countries have done the same with the so-called Palestinians. This is a purely political decision and also one of self-preservation for those Muslim countries. Jordan got a taste of this and had to ruthlessly put their Palestinian refugee population down in the '70s, just as, if not more ruthlessly than anything the Israelis have done up to this point. Palestinians are despised by the other Muslim societies.
This was very insightful, thanks. And you managed to do it without curling your lip and sneering at a large proportion of your readers (CJ Hopkins, will you please take note?).
I listened to a discussion this afternoon with a British journalist who is aJew who has followed this for 20+ years and has educated herself on the history after initially being ignorant of the background. Summary of her exposition of the history:
1. There have always been Jews in Israel (well, since Moses brought them out of Egypt to the land promised to Abram/Abraham & his descendants--accepted history by the 3 Abrahamic religions, but not by anyone else).
2. For a brief moment in time they were an independent nation/kingdom but have subsequently been conquered, exiled, repatriated, rinse and repeat, but with a remnant remaining: Assyrian, Babylonian, Medical-Persian, Greek, Roman, Ottoman... I may have missed a few (The Romans imposed the name Palestine on the region after they wiped out the Jewish rebellion that led to the destruction of the last Temple, cause they didn’t want to deal with the Jews any more, I guess)
3. WWI did in the Turkish Ottoman Empire, France & Britain divided up the Mideast under League of Nations mandate, the British getting ‘Palestine’. Clause in mandate stipulated that the Jews should be able to & encouraged to return & settle. At that time the countryside was sparsely populated with nomadic tribes (Bedouin, & others ) & Jews were the largest group in Jerusalem.
4. The Brits were reluctant to hostile to the return part of the mandate & IIRC encouraged Arabs to move in while Jews were migrating, & eventually there developed a bloody 3 sided war: Arab v Jew v Brit, which after WWII the Brits were tired of & handed the still in force League of Nations mandate (though honored more in the breach than observation ) to the UN to supervise. The original L o N mandate was for all of Palestine to become Jewish Israel, but the Brits sabotaged that by inviting the Arabs in leading to the ongoing conflict.
5. 1948 was supposed to be the birth of Israel, but the surrounding Arabs had other thoughts & invaded Israel. However, unexpectedly the Israelis won. Unfortunately, the land was partitioned roughly as it is today.
Surrounding Arab countries refused to allow the Palestinian Arabs to settle in their countries & still do, & maintain hostile to Israel, with notable exceptions.
Since 1948 I understand that both I & P (possibly to a lesser extent)have stoked the fire with false flag incidents in the hopes of an ultimate victory for their side.
That summary by the erudite British Jewess journalist (apologizes to her for any inaccuracies in my summary of her summary) fits well with what I recall from my schooling, knowledge of Biblical & ancient history, my contemporaneous reading in my younger days, and my time in Kurdistan after the 2nd Gulf war.
A mess, no one is without blood on their hands & no one is telling the truth, the whole truth & nothing but the truth ( including me).
Life is complicated and everything is relative. Tend your own garden. Appreciate humility.
The more that this column sits in my head, Chris, the more that it hits me as one of the most, nuanced articulate takes on a nasty issue. Neither side in this conflict has covered themselves in glory but the fact that the Israelis are being considerate of the big picture is pretty evident. Hopefully the Israelis toss Bibi and gun control in the trash. Frankly I just want us to stay out of this.
But especially gun control.
From your lips to God's ears. I was shocked to find out how bad Israeli gun control was. My assumption was they had something similar to the Swiss. It's not like any of their neighbors are friends.
Israel attempted to set up a two state peaceful situation in 1948 after partition. The Arabs refused and went to war. No Arab country would accept the resulting war refugees so they were relegated to Gaza along with Jews already living there. The Arabs continued fighting Israel using Gaza as a pretext for war. Israel has since offered a two state solution and been rebuffed.
This is a fight for existence on Israel's part and a continuing war of genocide on the part of the Arabs. If Israel surrenders, they die.
This seems like selective memory of history and if you say a peaceful situation was proffered then it must not have been made in good faith cause look at what has happened since 1948. I think you statement is hogwash.
I also think the whole 2-state solution is not workable and recent times seem to suggest that is the case. But maybe a 3-state solution would work....problem is nobody is talking at the table - it is nothing but missiles, harm, innocence dying once more and nothing changing for the better. That is not sustainable.
Fact of the matter is Israel is becoming isolated - China brokered an arrangement geopolitically genius twixt Saudi Arabia and Iran and now Israel is odd-man out self inflicted. Fact hurt and Israel needs to get their house in order, but in the middle of a civil war internal - what you think the chances of that are?
Sadly, given the history of it all, the chances are slim to none and a caged trickster has nothing left to offer but the dismay they have in their own minds, so best to cage Israel in for the sake of humanity. I say that with no disrespect, but the zionist are out of bounds on this and if they plan on killing the Palestinians, then they might as well plan on killing all humanity because metaphorically speaking the prison the Palestinians are within - a definitive open air prison of millions trapped - that is what they will do for the rest of us and they will come in and wipe us out if this travesty goes to conclusion in the minds of the demented ones.
All Hallows approaches and I hope you are ready cause the shit seems to be ready to hit the fan.
Excellent historical references and using the same to explain what is occurring in real time. Given that large parts of the ground in question was populated by Jews and Christians for centuries until the Ottomans, with the help of local Muslim tribes, killed off or drove off most of the infidels from the late 1800's to the early 1020's in a genocide in the Levant and Turkey, who is indigenous and who is a settler becomes harder to distinguish. After all, Hitler pointed to that genocide as an excellent example of how to conduct one thoroughly and effectively, echoes of which are still resonating in that part of the world by the Muslims. So, what is to be done? Given the loathing all throughout the Sunni world for the Palestinians, who already have their own country, called Jordan, but can't go there because the Jordanians fear and hate them, I think there will be much blood letting in Gaza and the immediate area, but that the Shiites will restrain themselves from a wider war. What will be critical is the Israelis being able to destroy Hama as a political entity and over time, bring back the Palestinians to a sane and less violent people. After all, that is what we have done here, as you point out, by ridding ourselves of the most violent and criminal of our societies, so that saner and cooler heads can prevail.
Danny Huckabee
I wish you would edit this post. I get it but ...
Chris, I really appreciate your insight and knowledge of American and military history when it comes to current events. It lends a tremendous amount of insight and context to what we're currently facing.