Anti Semistism growing with the left? - Page 2 - Politics and Society -- Two Plus Two Poker Forums

https://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Why-De...el-bias-579675

This it the article where I reference percentages of Republicans vs. Democrats supporting Israel.

You can certainly challenge the sources.

I have not verified them.

But your categorization is FALSE!

08-01-2019 , 08:54 PM

#28

coordi

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 22,930

Having one candidate address what would be considered a humanitarian issue doesn't really represent "growing antisemitism" to any extent. It definitely seems disingenuous to frame it as such.

08-01-2019 , 08:54 PM

#29

Luckbox Inc

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 61,315

He's trying to pander to the left and foriegn policy for the fake-left consists of opposing Israel and trying not to think too hard about anything else. Israel for the the fake left is basically a foriegn policy boogeyman that masks over a whole host of other foriegn policy related problems. Opposing Israel can be done in isolation from other neoliberal foriegn policy.

08-01-2019 , 08:55 PM

#30

Smudger2408

banned

Join Date: Jun 2019 Posts: 1,922

He only mentioned one country in the entire world.

WHy wouldn't he mention Russia, China, North Korea, many others?

08-01-2019 , 08:57 PM

#31

Willd

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 16,266

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smudger2408

I am not flagartanly lying!

The article is posted!

If I was flagarantly lying I wouldn't have posted the article.

I don't think it was what you meant to say, but you did say that Israel was the only nation he mentioned (i.e. not just only one mentioned negatively), which is certainly false:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smudger2408

Making a foreign policy speech, where the only nation you mention (Israel) is the only nation that would face negative consequences under your Presidency is bold.

Edit: You did it again

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smudger2408

He only mentioned one country in the entire world.

WHy wouldn't he mention Russia, China, North Korea, many others?

As for why he wouldn't mention those, the obvious answer is that the US already imposes sanctions on them all and there isn't one specific topic to point out like there is for the West Bank, Iran Nuclear Deal and Paris Climate Accord.

08-01-2019 , 08:57 PM

#32

MrWookie

Don't Call Me Meredith

Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 94,159

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smudger2408

What am I wrong about in the Vox article?

Israel is the only country he proposes negative consequences against for soverign actions.

You said it was the only nation mentioned. It was not. And the article doesn't list all the nations Pete discussed in his speech.

08-01-2019 , 08:58 PM

#33

Smudger2408

banned

Join Date: Jun 2019 Posts: 1,922

It was the only nation negatively mentioned, with consequences for behavior.

As stated.

08-01-2019 , 09:00 PM

#34

Luckbox Inc

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 61,315

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smudger2408

He only mentioned one country in the entire world.

WHy wouldn't he mention Russia, China, North Korea, many others?

He would look hawkish if he was threating America's 'traditional enemies'.

08-01-2019 , 09:01 PM

#35

MrWookie

Don't Call Me Meredith

Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 94,159

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smudger2408

He only mentioned one country in the entire world.

WHy wouldn't he mention Russia, China, North Korea, many others?

Nations he mentioned before Israel (either by name or by city or region within them):

Iraq
Tunisia
Afghanistan
Germany
China
Iran
France
Vietnam
Libya
Pakistan
Yemen

And that's an incomplete list.

08-01-2019 , 09:02 PM

#36

MrWookie

Don't Call Me Meredith

Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 94,159

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smudger2408

It was the only nation negatively mentioned, with consequences for behavior.

As stated.

Also false.

08-01-2019 , 09:03 PM

#37

coordi

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 22,930

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smudger2408

It was the only nation negatively mentioned, with consequences for behavior.

As stated.

Vox is positive about Pete reentering the Iran agreement because evidence points to that meaning they have less nuclear weapons. Do you think that is because Vox sees Iran as the level headed, responsible, good guy?

08-01-2019 , 09:03 PM

#38

Huehuecoyotl

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 29,282

Wasn't this same gambit used for the anti apartid South Africa? They accused their critics of focusing on them when there were so many other bad things going on in the world?

So not even true about Mayor Pete

08-01-2019 , 09:05 PM

#39

Smudger2408

banned

Join Date: Jun 2019 Posts: 1,922

And Mr. Wookie, what are negative consequences he would introduce to any of the above for soverign actions, as you have listened to whole speech?

08-01-2019 , 09:06 PM

#40

Luckbox Inc

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 61,315

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huehuecoyotl

Wasn't this same gambit used for the anti apartid South Africa? They accused their critics of focusing on them when there were so many other bad things going on?

So not even true about Mayor Pete

Not sure if this is a response directed at me. I think it's fine to criticize Israel. But it's also super fair to say that the left either 1) does focus too much on Israel or 2) the right makes it seem that way.

08-01-2019 , 09:06 PM

#41

Smudger2408

banned

Join Date: Jun 2019 Posts: 1,922

And, why did the Vox article not mention such in his five points?

08-01-2019 , 09:07 PM

#42

MrWookie

Don't Call Me Meredith

Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 94,159

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smudger2408

And Mr. Wookie, what are negative consequences he would introduce to any of the above for soverign actions, as you have listened to whole speech?

Denuclearization of Iran and North Korea, as a start, although the means by which of achieving the latter wasn't tied to a specific policy proposal, it was only listed as a policy goal, so it didn't make the list of specific policy proposals.

08-01-2019 , 09:10 PM

#43

MrWookie

Don't Call Me Meredith

Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 94,159

Yup, and there's a mention of Russia, too. Talked about extensively before Israel, but without concrete policy proposals, but there wasn't a specific policy proposal, only broad descriptions of the kinds of tools that could be used to counter them.

08-01-2019 , 09:11 PM

#44

Smudger2408

banned

Join Date: Jun 2019 Posts: 1,922

So, only specific action, as stated, was against Israel?

And, I will now listen to full speech, as I loved Mayor Pete's proposal of US troops returning after 3 years, if no Congressional approval.

Vox is clearly pandering to anti Israel view.

08-01-2019 , 09:12 PM

#45

MrWookie

Don't Call Me Meredith

Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 94,159

Increasing foreign aid to Central American countries probably should have made the cut as a specific policy proposal.

08-01-2019 , 09:12 PM

#46

MrWookie

Don't Call Me Meredith

Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 94,159

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smudger2408

So, only specific action, as stated, was against Israel?

False.

08-01-2019 , 09:16 PM

#47

Smudger2408

banned

Join Date: Jun 2019 Posts: 1,922

Specific negative action. What others are there?

08-01-2019 , 09:17 PM

#48

Luckbox Inc

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 61,315

Wookie,
Do you agree that there is such a thing as a left that disproportionately focuses on Israel that masks other foriegn policy related issues? (Regardless of whatever Buttigieg said or didn't say.)

08-01-2019 , 09:17 PM

#49

Smudger2408

banned

Join Date: Jun 2019 Posts: 1,922

Increasing aid to central America, Iran nuke deal and Paris accord are positive actions.

List another negative action that he states.

08-01-2019 , 09:21 PM

#50

MrWookie

Don't Call Me Meredith

Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 94,159

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smudger2408

Increasing aid to central America, Iran nuke deal and Paris accord are positive actions.

List another negative action that he states.

You think Iran is just clamoring to give up its nuclear ambitions and submit to international arms inspections on the regular? Nuclear weapons are the greatest guarantee of safety for the existing regime possible. They know what happened to Saddam and Qaddafi, and they know how Kim Jong-Un is doing.

Page 2 of 10

First

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Last

Closed Thread Subscribe

...

Page 2 of 10

First

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Last