"First, let me put all my cards on the table. I believe that the intentional killing of civilians whether by Palestinian terrorists on the ground or by the Israeli Air Force from the sky is a war crime. As far as killing kids, I will paraphrase what Lincoln said about slavery: if killing a child, any child, is not wrong then nothing is wrong."First of all, I wonder if this also applies to child soldiers, a common Palestinian tactic that I'm sure Rosenberg would be happier pretending didn't exist. And of course the IAF has never intentionally killed any civilian, the historical record on that is very clear. So already Rosenberg is establishing a nonexistent moral equivalence between those who intentionally kill civilians and fail and those who don't intentionally kill civilians yet do so anyway. Which we have been over a million times already. But anyway, now that he tries to sound evenhanded, let's see if he can keep it up:
"Nonetheless, Israel and the Palestinians resumed the cycle of violence again this week and, if not stopped, it will spiral into mass civilian carnage. Both sides are responsible. But I do not hold a bunch of rag tag terrorist thugs to the same standards I apply to a powerful state. So, yes, I do expect more from Israel."Point 1: It is a straight up lie to imply that both of these groups "resumed the cycle of violence." Israel was existing normally (with all the grievances implied within that) when the Palestinians launched a premeditated, elaborate attack involving four different units. To which Israel responded. So no, there's no equivalence here. No Palestinian attack, no Israeli response. If Rosenberg can't see that, there's not much that can help him.
Point 2: These same "rag tag terrorist thugs" not only won Palestinian elections but are necessary for peace and should be part of a coalition government...at least according to Rosenberg. How is it that Rosenberg can marginalize Hamas as insignificant and small and yet at the same time encourage Israel to negotiate with them? The representation two step is back yet again, and Rosenberg doesn't dance it very well. Big surprise.
As much as I would like to leave it at that, we haven't even passed the first two paragraphs. So let's skim a bit:
"Besides, every bullet and bomb Israel uses against Palestinians is paid for by the American taxpayer"WRONG.
"We oppose Hamas and have no leverage with it."WRONG.
"But we subsidize Israel with more aid than any other country in the world."WRONG.
"Israel's behavior endangers our interests, as General David Petraeus told Congress, including our men and women in the Middle East."WRONG.
Okay I'm going to stop there, but I could be doing this the whole article, as the lies never end. We have no leverage over Hamas, Israel needs to end the blockade and if they don't Gaza is still occupied, and so forth. Others are hopelessly naive: Like telling Hamas that they will only get our support if they cease all violence. What a freaking joke, as if we haven't been telling that to the Palestinians for years and one more time will make the difference.
As for the rest of the article, it goes like the above. Israel helping the Palestinians screw them is really "pro-Israel," and so America must do it, blah blah blah. Shockingly, AIPAC doesn't appear even once. I guess he does have more than one note.