Schwarzenegger to lead economic delegation to Israel in May

[Herschel]

Sources inform “Globes” that California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger will visit Israel at the head of a delegation of Jewish Californian businesspeople. Former Packard Bell president Beny Alagem and Saban Entertainment president Haim Saban will also participate. Saban recently acquired Germany's KirchMedia.

The visit by the Hollywood actor and recently elected as governor will topuch on economic issues. A group of Israeli companies active in California, or which have pending plans to do so, recently asked Israelis representatives to personally handle relations with Governor Schwarzenegger's office.

cut

http://www.globes.co.il/serveen/globes/docview.asp?did=779924&fid=942

Wonderful news. America's bipartisan support for Israel ensures her survival.

[Gimel]

1. Hope the plan

doesn't get canceled due to ongoing terror.

[Resistance]

7. which terror?

the Al-Aqsa/Hamas bombings or the IDF shooting kids in the back?

[GabysPoppy]

8. These kids?

Watch the television footage of this week's raids in the Nusseirat and Bureij refugee camps, and there they are – hundreds of children, wearing school backpacks and wielding slingshots, clustered around masked gunmen as they ambush Israeli troops.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x59737

[lefty_mcduff]

9. The troops were actualy taking part in a raid

in the Nusseirat and Bureij refugee camps so it's arguable that nobody was being 'ambushed'.

Where I come from, that's called defending my home. Or my country. Or my street. Take your pick...

Here's more from Haaretz

"In the last of these operations, the one that resulted in the killing of 15 Palestinians last week, Shamni even articulated a new IDF doctrine: "stimulus and response." The purpose of the operation, it was reported, was "to stimulate the armed individuals to come out and then kill them off." This method, which led to the killing of innocent people, including children, drew no critical reaction. No one asked why every armed Palestinian is marked for death and why it's necessary to "stimulate" armed people in Gaza altogether."

[GabysPoppy]

10. And you would have your children outside at that time?

:shrug:

[lefty_mcduff]

11. Of course not.

I find getting kids being involved in any violent action to be reprehensbile. But that was not the point I made. So I will make it again. The gun battles that took place last week have begun to morph into IDF soldiers being 'ambushed'.

That simply isn't true.

A more accurate description is that Palestinians were defending their homes. Street. Camp. Take your pick. Might also change the idea of kids being involved from being evidence of the Palestinians being 'barabarians' to a portrait of a desperate, last-ditch defence. Alamo stuff.

But that would mean putting a human face on the Pals, and we can't have that...

[GabysPoppy]

13. The ORIGINAL point was the involvement of the children

You want to change that fine, but until you address the original point your avoidance is too obvious.

Put a "human face" on those kids and explain to me WTF they are doing there. Put a "human face" on the adults(?) who allow and encourage this to happen.

You just don't get a "Mr. Roger's" or "Daniel Boone" face as one of the options.

[lefty_mcduff]

14. My Pleasure.

Firstly - you claimed the gun battle was an 'ambush'. It wasn't. And BTW - the use of 'ambush' changes the entire slant of the piece. One describes defending homes, the other is describing a sneak-attack on unsuspecting soldiers minding their own business.

Secondly - I said *I* find the involvement of children in any violent confrontation reprehensible. Did you not read that part of my post? That is *my* personal opinion. Still with me?

Thirdly - If I was defending my home against marauding soldiers, I would like to think that I could *protect* my 14 year old son, and keep him out of the fray. It's highly unlikely that he would agree, because *he* would want to defend *his* house. 14 year old little boys like to act like they are men. Quite simple really. Inject some cultural and historical differences into the situation, and I can see how this could happen, while still opposing it.

By the way - you're the one avoiding my original point. That this wasn't an ambush as you claimed.

That one word changes everything about the story.

Not sure about the 'Mr. Rogers' reference (was he at the Alamo?), but the 'Daniel Boone' reference works quite well.

[GabysPoppy]

15. Response

Firstly - I didn't claim shit. That was a quote from an article I posted earlier this morning. If you had noticed, I believed I added a link at the same time.

Secondly - you said you found involvement reprehensible and that decided to turn the issue into whether an ambush was involved. The point was involvement of children and not the definition of an operation.

Thirdly - Once again you insert a "strawman" argument to justify why you wouldn't be able to control your 14 year old son. And just about try to justify his involvement.

Had you done any research, you probably would have noticed that many of the kids were far younger than 14 year olds. Tell me, at what age would you get your kid's ass inside and away from danger regardless of the circumstances?

I am talking about the parents and adults in Palestinian areas who expose their children to these dangers, not some imaginary army coming down your block in the middle of suburbia. I am talking about real live terrorists with a rifle in one hand and a child in the other being used as a shield. I am talking about real live terrorists operating a small mortar using children to encircle their position in the hope he will not be fired upon. If you want to address reality, we can discuss reality. If you want to discuss an episode of the X-Files find someone else.

[lefty_mcduff]

16. Okey-Dokey.

The Truth is Out There.

[GabysPoppy]

17. Not "out there"

Just above your "Okey-Dokey" post

[lefty_mcduff]

20. Alright. I tried, but...

Firstly - You "didn't claim shit". Perhaps. But you did quote (verbatim) from an article that you seemingly agreed with, did you not? And if you did not agree with the term 'ambush' perhaps you should have clarified that. And if you do agree with the term 'ambush' then my point stands.

Secondly - The ORIGINAL post actually deals with Arnold Schwarzenegger, so it was not I who changed the thread. I didn't turn the discussion. I merely commented on a post you had made. That comment is summed up in 'Firstly'.

Thirdly - You asked *me* very specifically if *I* would allow *my* children to be out in such an event. I did not insert a "straw man" argument - I answered a question that you asked specifically of me. And I answered the question, using my *real* 14 year old son in a hypothetical situation - the only way I could, save going and getting involved in an actual gun battle. I'm not going to do that, because as I pointed out - I would try and protect my child as much as I could.

What age would I get my "kid's ass" inside and away from trouble? There is *no* age limit. As he got older, I would be less effective, but pretty well any age. Not sure what the point is, but once again, I answered your question. And BTW - children who are *younger* than my son does not lessen the point. BTW part2 - if Palestinian parents are irresponsible, that certainly does NOT give the IDF a license to blast though kids, especially in a raid that's only sole purpose is to 'stimulate' the Palestinians into confrontation. But don't take my word for this - please read the military quote from a few posts ago.

All the other situations that you are describing may have happened, and are horrible, but that is neither the situation that we were discussing, nor the hypothetical situations I came up with.

You're right on one point - I cannot discuss reality with you.
So let's not.

[Djinn]

18. why is it OK

for people to pack up their kids and leave a relatively stable, safe and secure country and move to Israel, placing their kids in harms way but yet somehow the Palestinians are supposed to rem,ove their kids from harms way which could only mean leaving the OT completely???

[GabysPoppy]

19. Please read the entire thread

your question which might be an interesting topic for discussion is about a thousand miles from the intent of the original discussion.

I know (because you said so) you have friends in the ISM who were present during Rachel's accident, do you also have friends in the Chasidic communities also that you know have left "stable and safe homes to make aliyah too?

[Djinn]

23. that's funny

coz in a post above YOU claim the original point is the involvement of children??? (post 13 "The ORIGINAL point was the involvement of the children") even though the ORIGINAL intent seems to be about Arnie making an "economic" visit, but I digress.

Also in adult discourse a convesation can move through different topics, I'm happy with my post and have no need to read the thread again.

On your points...Yes I know people in ISM - I am not and never have been a part of it. I have never backed away from that statement I have simply asked you to clarify yours about speaking to the IDF as, I stated several times, this is against IDF policy and is something many journalists have been denied. Don't know what that has to do with this but like I said I'm happy for the discussion to move around.

Yes people leave stable homes (in the US for example) to live in Israel, a place, I think you'd have to admit, that's not entirely safe and stable, particularly if people move to the settlements - although admittedly many Israeli's have moved there for economic reasons.

Are you trying to suggest that no-one has emigrated to Israel (you can use the term Aliyah if you like I'm secular so I prefer emigrate)-in the past 50 years? or that not one of those people left western democracies or that they had no children or that perhaps that Israel is not and never has been dangerous?? I'm sorry but the only part of this thread I don't get is your post above.



Edit. For spelling

[lefty_mcduff]

2. You may want to read up a little on

Schwarzenegger's colorful past to see how 'appropriate' it is for Arnold to lead *any* delegation to Israel.

And why is it that once again, you're gushing over *REPUBLICAN* politicians on a *DEMOCRATIC* web site.

Just curious...

[Gimel]

3. He's welcome

as in anyone who comes in peace. Of course there is a security check at the airport. His bodyguards will have to play it cool and not get too aggressive.

[lefty_mcduff]

6. No. His history.

Some weddings he's attended. Stuff like that. Arnold has some interesting friends. And family. He's also a misogynist pig, but that's another story entirely. Glad you're a fan...

[Gimel]

21. I'm not a fan of his

But I'm sure that as a government representative of one of the largest states in the US, there would be no censure of his entrance into Israel. There is a security check for everyone, and unless someone is a wanted criminal, there is not a check for morality or opinions on women's rights. I do not plan to meet personally with him, and do not, in fact give much thought to him, although I am a former Californian.

Israel does not expect moral purity from it's visitors. You do not have to undergo confession or conversion at the port.

[meti57b]

12. Gimel, ... Israel would be more than welcome to even keep him ....

That would be an enormous favor to the half of California who thinks he's detestable.

[Gimel]

22. No one-way tickets

Of course a round-trip ticket is one of the pre-requisits for visitors.

;-)

[Herschel]

4. I often celebrate

Bipartisan support for Israel. This ensures she will remain in a powerful posisition. The Palestinians hold no hope for a friendlier American government. Be glad.

[lefty_mcduff]

5. And the violence will never end.

So I'll hold off on the glad.

[Classical_Liberal]

26. You celebrate support of settlers and the Israelis right

but for some reason nobody notices.

[Evil_Dewers]

24. Wonderful news. America's bipartisan support for Israel ensures her surviv

That $4 billion a year and billion in loans that will never be paid back doesn't hurt, either.

Hide your Jewish women, the son of a Nazi, Herr Gropenfürher is coming.

[Classical_Liberal]

25. Actually it is bipartisan support of the right wingers that insures Israel

will not survive. I think Israel will get nuked if it keeps up.

[Evil_Dewers]

27. I think Israel will get nuked if it keeps up.

But then what will we talk about?