lake county democrat

If so that was a mistake: there are lots of dictators in the world, but Saddam was near uniquely expansionist - he literally saw himself as a modern Saladin.

momentum was with lifting the sanctions (remember Powell's "smart sanctions") - presume a similar minded successor (maybe his sons) we might have a more powerful adversary than Iran today.

But was that the right decision? What followed was a decade of Saddam diverting oil revenues to his military for a decade ( Bush 41 simultaneously abandoned the Kurds, who would suffer until Clinton's no-fly zone circa '98). But for 9/11 and GWB's near delusional fever for war against Saddam, the

Again, you're lying. I said the majority of antizionists are antisemitic- if you can't understand that implies a minority *aren't* antisemitic, I can't help you. But I suspect you do understand, which is why you dodged the question. Bye now.

If so then you weren't attacked, but I see no evidence you don't fit flipping through your TL. How about this: list the nations that officially discriminate based on religion and ones created expressly for the purpose of creating a religious/ethnic homeland you've publicly attacked-I'll believe you

Cool - can't wait for the antizionists who don't fit my description to respond. Not harsh Israel critics who aren't hypocrites (e.g., Nick Kristof) but antizionists. Hope they provide some links though.

Ha! Leaving aside I addressed my comments to a subset of those criticizing Israel (Some of my criticisms of Israel are illegal to voice within the nation), "whataboutism" is part of our civil rights law. You're like a racist cop who targets one group and cries "whataboutism!" to critics.

Again, horsefeathers: I start with the universe of antizionists and describe the subset who are antisemitic. I don't say that group's antisemitism flows from their antizionism - indeed, it's the opposite. You can stop digging that hole now.

And even the criticism becomes bigotry if it involves double standards - that's not that applicable here, but when it comes to antizionists you find most have no issue with nations that officially discriminate based on religion or were created for reasons similar to Israel.

You're overreading - I said antizionists who engage in antisemitism. That said, *most* antizionists are antisemitic bc of their hypocrisy: they have no issue with states who officially and deeply discriminate based on religion. They're like racist cops who claim to merely be against crime.

Sorry, I have standards.

And the civil rights movement fueled a new level of Klan violence - oppose this war action or not, you can't base decision making on the reaction of bigots.

That understates things - at least half (I'd argue more) Israel critics are antizionists who engage in all sorts of antisemitism (latest example: Ana Kasparin's "goyim" tweet and Cenk Ughar's follow-ups) and will weaponize this as well.

So you can opine on this but when a mob shuts down a Jewish comedian you don't even have the courage to stand by your initial wet noodle response.

After your cowardice re: the mob's veto of Jewish comedians you should delete your account.

Except it's good advice, I think most fans think the Ravens are making a mistake and Harbaugh is paying for Lamar Jackson's poor playoff performances, and the court case that bankrupted the USFL is ridiculous (jury finds the NFL broke the Sherman Act antitrust law but awards $1 in damages).

I'm sensing knowledge of football may be an area the hellhole site exceeds Bluesky.

I don't know if it was underrated by critics, but "The Rapture" with Mimi Rogers and David Duchovny is incredible - the (half-filled) theater I saw it in walked out in stunned silence in reaction to the last three minutes.

back, full stop. Or how about 50%? 25%? 10%? 1%? Get real - their argument is that the statute of limitations oh-so-conveniently has run on those atrocities, but not on Israel.

US citizenship the former would win? You think these antizionists would accept a gigantic cut in their quality of life and future prospects to pay fair compensation for what was taken in the last century alone? And don't only look at it at the government level: if you own stolen land, give it

There's no parallel in the least - that "right to vote" is used as a fig leaf to get out of paying a massive debt. You think if the United States offered the equivalent of the Camp David or Olmert offer to the surviving Native American nations or, alternatively, keeping the right to vote and

celebrities who talk so sharply about Israel positively wilt when faced with anything that would anger the CCP. They saw what happened to Richard Gere and Daryl Mosey.

consumer (boycotts of "blood diamonds" had a real impact). But most of all the USA, and particularly the left, has to be willing to take on China both on their diplomacy and internal human rights (and cyberwarfare against Western businesses and their cheating on the Paris Agreement). The same

Re: Sudan - easier in 2004-5 - it's a realpolitik nightmare today because we rely on UAE and the Saudis for a lot, but yes, if Trump wasn't so desperate for cheap oil to counteract his inflationary economic moves. We have more power with respect to conflict minerals both at the government level and

I think it's something much darker, rooted in the belief of a sizeable percentage of Palestinian Muslims (Hamas has no use for Christians and forced most out of Gaza) that they can out-martyr the Jews in the long run.

Abbas' rejection of the Olmert proposal and mixed record of the PA fighting terrorist attacks including on Israel proper. Question: do you truly believe the settlements and Israeli human rights abuses is what's preventing peace? I'm willing to risk that it is, but if you put a pistol to my head

even though none of the settlements are justified this would have accommodated that concern while preserving territory for the Palestinians). But in terms of the occupation there is just so much context here, going back at least to when Arafat likened the Oslo Accords to the Treaty of Hhudaybiyyah

We should be outraged by that and the settlements in general, which are war crimes under the Geneva Convention. I support an old proposal from early in Obama's first term that we reduce aid if Israel horizontally expanded the settlements (Israel claimed they needed to accommodate population growth-

(Correction -my changing of the disease analogy isn't related to my first comment (which was that the argument isn't that one has no right to protest Gaza, it's that people protesting Gaza refuse to walk and chew gum).