Elizabeth Warren faces angry questions about Gaza at town hall

[Report1212]

I'm wondering if enough constituents confronting her on this will get her to change her stance

But when the man in the green Hawaiian shirt stood up, Warren went from voicing her support for those local causes to defending her vote to send $225 million to Israel in its ongoing conflict with Hamas.

"We are disagreeing with Israel using their guns against innocents. It's true in Ferguson, Missouri, and it's true in Israel," said Harwich resident John Bangert, who identified himself as a Warren supporter but said the $225 million could have been spent on infrastructure or helping immigrants fleeing Central America.

"The vote was wrong, I believe," he added, drawing applause from several in the crowd.

Warren told Bangert she appreciated his comments, but "we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one."

"I think the vote was right, and I'll tell you why I think the vote was right," she said. "America has a very special relationship with Israel. Israel lives in a very dangerous part of the world, and a part of the world where there aren't many liberal democracies and democracies that are controlled by the rule of law. And we very much need an ally in that part of the world."

Warren said Hamas has attacked Israel "indiscriminately," but with the Iron Dome defense system, the missiles have "not had the terrorist effect Hamas hoped for." When pressed by another member of the crowd about civilian casualties from Israel's attacks, Warren said she believes those casualties are the "last thing Israel wants."

"But when Hamas puts its rocket launchers next to hospitals, next to schools, they're using their civilian population to protect their military assets. And I believe Israel has a right, at that point, to defend itself," Warren said, drawing applause.

Noreen Thompsen, of Eastham, proposed that Israel should be prevented from building any more settlements as a condition of future U.S. funding, but Warren said, "I think there's a question of whether we should go that far."

Read more: http://www.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20140821/NEWS/408210325/-1/news11

[Cali_Democrat]

1. Bernie Sanders is getting shit too...

Of course that story was met with a collective DU yawn:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025451434

[Report1212]

3. His response was better than Warren

At least he said Israel overreacted. Warren party line could've been a netanyahu spokesperson

[joshcryer]

7. I share Sanders' view 100%.

Can't say I share Warren's even remotely given her non-committal response. At least Sanders took a stance and blamed both sides, as is the only correct thing to do.

[MADem]

52. Warren's vote was not going to make a difference.

Warren's constituency has WAY more Jews than Arabs--MA is not NY or FL, but it follows along nicely. Over four percent of the population of MA is Jewish, and unlike some constituencies, they are reliable voters. AND donors.

It's not unheard-of for Senators to vote in a way that a substantial, donating percentage of their constituencies want them to vote.

Unless and until that "man in the green Hawaiian shirt" can pony up enough votes and cash to counteract the influence of the Israel-supporting population segment that does GOTV for EW, he's not going to prevail. And EW will always be a better bet than any opponent the GOP can put up on most issues of concern to that guy in the green shirt.

I think people who were surprised at her vote just do not understand the reality of politics.

She wouldn't have made a difference voting the other way, and she would have pissed off a lot of people who supported her candidacy in terms of votes and cash, and presumably will again in 2018.

[Report1212]

68. I think the problem with this issue is politicians overrate how much pro-Israel people matter

Some people would get upset, sure, but she's a wildly popular Senator. It would barely hurt her in her state. I think this issue is such a taboo from fear not substance

[MADem]

69. I think the problem is realpolitik.

Israel, like it or not, is a staunch ally in a disordered region of the world. Their intelligence is usually top-notch, their HUMINT beats ours hands-down, and they have the bubble on what's happening around their region--and beyond.

We're very nice to them in terms of mil-to-mil efforts, Foreign Military Sales (FMS) and loans and grants, which is why some accuse them of being "The 51st State." We do get "value received" for our generosity, and plausible deniability when needed as well. We share intelligence. Sometimes, there's a bit of overreach, and we end up with Pollard messes. For the most part, though, we are friends who keep an eye on one another. While we wish that there could be a "solution" to the Palestinian issue, every time, it seems, we see some daylight, a hardliner pops up with the whole "Push the Jews into the sea" rhetoric, and we're back to Square One. I used to think we'd see a solution as Arafat mellowed, but with his sudden and mysterious death (murder?), that hope flew out the window. I will probably be dead before a solution is found, and probably many if not all of the people posting on this board will be, too. In sum--I'm not holding my breath.

People might not like these truths, but that's what they are. We can despair over the violence in Palestine, and the enthusiasm for some to place innocent citizens in harms' way as a way to bring humanitarian attention to their cause, and the reaction by Israel, while at the same time recognizing that Israel is going to do what Israel feels they need to do, and while we can try to mediate and mitigate, we're probably not going to do much more than throw a bandaid or two on a gaping wound, no matter how sincere we are, or how hard we try.

We're just "not the boss" of this situation. We never have been, and we never will be.

[OLDMADAM]

62. The Gaza tormoil.. A pox on both their houses.. Enough already..

Last edited Thu Aug 28, 2014, 06:52 PM - Edit history (1)

First, not a single neighbor in the middle east wants Israel as a neighbor, and there hasn't been a moments peace in their history.. Second, I cannot support a country that treats women the way the majority of the Arab countries treat their own.. The fundamentalist Muslims want to kill everyone that don't agree with everything they believe, including their own more moderate sects and woman and children.. Whats that about?

I say pull out of the mid east, and let them find peace and settle their own difficulties, period.. We aren't making anything better, except making more enemies and spending money we don't have..

[Cha]

2. At least think about from a different perspective.. thank you, Report

[cpwm17]

4. Elizabeth Warren, just like Bernie Sanders earlier

should be challenged on her support for Israel.

Their support for Israel can't be defended, and this is a good litmus test on what kind of people they really are.

[magical thyme]

60. every candidate should be challenged on this. All of them. Force them into the spotlight. nt

[woo me with science]

64. +100000

[Behind the Aegis]

5. Good for Warren.

The true single issue voters will dump all over her.

[joshcryer]

8. I see them ignoring it completely.

I prefer Sanders' stance (Israel used excessive force, Hamas doesn't recognize Israel's right to exist).

But Warren has "cred" and they can't dump on her, lest they become pro-banker or some such nonsense (it's impossible in this environment to, you know, have different opinions on different things; you're either for or against something, no shades of gray).

[leftynyc]

26. That's what's become of DU

If you don't follow the "liberal" view 100%, you're a right winger. I'm thinking they don't realize how much like teabaggers they sound like. Look how the hero Rubio is treated since he had a more humane position on immigration. He'll never win even one primary on that issue alone.

[appal_jack]

50. I agree with Senator Warren on this as well.

I agree with Senator Warren on this as well. It is neither hypocritical nor problematic for a progressive US Senator to support important ongoing ties with Israel. Israel's record on women's rights, LGBTQ rights, rights of free expression, and many other areas of civil society shines brighter than any other nation in that region of the world.

Palestinian civilians certainly deserve better security, dignity, freedom, and a nation of their own as well. But the US severing ties with Israel would not be a good means to this end.

-app

[cascadiance]

56. If she has any plans on 2016, focusing all of her time on this issue would get in the way of that...

As the media and many other forces would force her to do that and to spend less time on so many other issues that she's been working hard on for us lately.

My suspicion is that she has a more nuanced stance, though I can't say that I know that in any way without her taking a public stance on it.

Even if she isn't running in 2016, and is mostly focused on being a force of leadership in the Senate on transparency and accountability for banking issues, the PTB could use her taking a "non-standard" response as a way to go after her and distract her from that. I suspect that is why so many other politicians are also "following suit" in not challenging Israel much now. They know it is a losing battle on an issue that in terms of priorities if we want to fix our system now is lower than many others.

In terms of importance to the world and human rights, its priority should be near the top, but to just focus energy on that that being a dissenter would entail would keep us from solving the fundamental problems of corporate corruption of our parties that need solving now before we can really tackle many other issues properly.

I think as long as we the people that champion non-corporate options to run our government raise our voices, it is US that should also be the ones speaking strongly on Israel as well, so when the time comes where we can actually get some electoral wins, then many of those newer pols in newer positions will realize at that time they need to take some decisive action to change the equation on how we deal with Israel and many other international situations too. The media can't have us "distracted" with Israel if we choose to continue to focus on election integrity, campaign financing, corporate personhood, etc. too.

If she were to win the presidency and use her leadership to focus on the issues she's been good at so far in terms of fixing nationally, and appoint a VERY GOOD Secretary of State who becomes a strong voice of leadership to fixing the problems of Palestinians vs. Israel, then that will be far more manageable than for her to try to micromanage that all herself.

[littlemissmartypants]

6. Kicking. Thank you. nt

[Scuba]

9. She lost me over this issue. I had to change my sig line.

[FrodosPet]

14. That's OK, I got you covered

The story of my life - always picking up the slack!

[merrily]

15. Would her vote the other way really have made any difference?

I cannot say I prefer Warren to Sanders or that I want Warren to be the nominee. For me, this is just too soon to say much about the nomination that is binding on me, except that I hope Hill doesn't get it (though I think she might). This time in 2006 I was far from clear on the primary, so this is not new for me.

However, my clear opinion is that this vote is not a reason to switch loyalties unless it was a deciding vote. Otherwise, it's what I call D.C. kabuki. As far as what she said to justify the vote, I am so over basing support or opposition on words.

Don't get me wrong. Of all the Democrats in office today, Warren and Sanders are both among my very favorites. However,, I will not choose between them based on liking one explanation of the same vote better than the other explanation.

[Scuba]

20. It wasn't the vote, it was her statement on the issue. Too hawkish, too pro-Israel ...

... regardless of right or wrong.

[merrily]

21. As I said, I don't base much on statements.

What she said was politician standard and of very temporary and small impact in the real world compared with her vote.

Obviously, you are free to be relatively okay with her vote, but unable to tolerate some standard phrases she used to justify it. I just cannot think that way any more. Nor can I take what happens in the Senate or the House at face value anymore.

[closeupready]

48. I agree. Taking her out of my sig line.

I still like her a bunch, though.

[LloydS of New London]

10. I guess she's gettin' that Good Sign

[kelliekat44]

11. Me too. This issue is so far-reaching on many levels. If we can't stand up to "friend"

when they are doing wrongly then we have no moral authority to drop bombs on people who are innocent and do us no harm.

[FrodosPet]

12. I was wondering when this would happen!

Not that I really have to ask this, nor that you will ever read it, but please follow your conscious and not a bunch of message board posters, Sen. Warren!

[cantbeserious]

13. At This Rate - Some Will Have None Left To Vote For In 2016

eom

[FrodosPet]

16. What about Vermin Supreme?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermin_Supreme

Fighting the good fight against tooth decay!

[merrily]

18. WTF? I stand with tooth decay!

(An emote I thought might insult the intelligence of DUers when included in a patently sarcastic post.)

[Vattel]

24. Think of the great choices we have:

Bank-lover Biden, Hillary the hawk, arrest-'m-all O'Malley, Israel-ueber-alles Elizabeth. The list goes on and on.

[cantbeserious]

27. The List Of Candidates Is Diminishing Quickly

eom

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

36. Uh, they're ALL Israel fans.

I think about the only (mild) criticism I've seen of Israel from any elected official was Keith Ellison.

[Vattel]

44. good point

[VanGoghRocks]

58. Kshama Sawant (of Socialist Alliance) uttered a pretty strong condemnation of Israel's

actions in Gaza, albeit flavored with too much "A plague on both your houses" spice for my tastes.

[Alkene]

17. Disappointing. n/t

[Vattel]

19. fuck warren

[Welibs]

23. I couldn't agree more!

[Welibs]

22. Incredibly Warren takes the 'Israel has a right to defend itself' bullshit low road.

Israel consistently blocks supply shipments to Gaza, that's why the rockets don't stop. Israel won't allow food, water, supplies or medicine through. Also the land belongs to the Palestinians and they have to go through Israel to leave the country unless it's by air. Israel has admitted that they want to annihilate the Palestinians and take the rest of the land for themselves.

The fact that Warren agrees to disagree is bullshit! That's NOT her decision to make, she works for those people, what she wants is insignificant!

She agreed to send $225M in aid knowing that Israel will use it to buy more ammo to kill innocent people with... while Americans have austerity and sequestration shoved down their throats! More bullshit!

Bernie voted for the $225M as well and a week before that he was praising John McCain for being a big war hero while the bastard continues selling arms to rebels, including the ones that attacked Benghazi. McCain is no war hero, he's a fraud... they're all frauds.

The US needs a saviour, a JFK type man or woman, but they only materialize every few generations and when they do Republicans put a hit out on them before they can say "I Solemnly Swear....."

The thought of Hillary getting in makes me cry out of fear. She'll have to prove to the Good Ol' Boys Club that she can be a bigger prick than they are and Margaret Thatcher will look like Little Bo Peep in comparison.

No matter how you look at it... we're headin' for the rhubarb!

[VanGoghRocks]

59. Warren obviously didn't see this article. Or if she did, she has a heart of total, utter

stone. (The pictures alone are damning):

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/15/world/middleeast/israelis-watch-bombs-drop-on-gaza-from-front-row-seats.html?ref=world&_r=0

[Laughing Mirror]

63. They're all frauds

Yes they are.

[stevenleser]

25. Reality is hard on candidates people think will ride in on a white horse and save everyone. nt

[leftynyc]

28. Even harder for those

who lionize them and expect agreement on 100% of the issues.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

31. Most folks aren't that naive.

This is one of the issues I feel Warren is still, disappointingly, too much like every other politician out there. Still, even being wrong on this, she's light years ahead of most of the candidates out there, just like Bernie.

There are no perfect candidates, but there are ones who stand out despite a few disappointments.

[leftynyc]

32. I love both Warren and Sanders

but believe both would get decimated in a national election. And don't kid yourself, plenty of DUers are that naive.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

34. I think that would depend upon who they face.

I think they would likely struggle more, but the Republicans are 4 more years down the path to demographic oblivion at the national level than they were last time, and generally can't help offering up a clown car. The RNC is trying its best to prevent Americans from actually letting them smack each other with pies, so we'll just have to see how much of the clown show they get to do this next time around.

Do either have the same name recognition as Hillary? Of course not. But they both are riding very strong messages that feed into what Americans really care about - their own pocketbooks. Let them get out and campaign more, and their numbers will go up in those head to head polls. Enough to win? Don't know. As I said, it depends on who they face. But at this same point in the cycle in 2006 or so, 99% of political junkies would have told you Barack Obama would get decimated in a national election in 2008.

[leftynyc]

37. Senator Obama was not

nearly as liberal as either Sen Warren or Sanders. There was so little difference between him and Hillary it was hilarious (and dumbfounding) to watch the wars on DU from those trying to insist Sen Obama was so much more liberal than Hillary. The man campaigned as a centrist and governed as a centrist and people here act all betrayed. They weren't paying attention and foisted all their hopes and dreams into a candidate that was never what they proclaimed him to be.

The republican establishment will never allow a ted cruz to get the nod. If they have to throw a scapegoat into the primary season to split the votes of the crazies, that's exactly what they'll do.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

41. Nor was he even as well known as either Warren or Sanders, who routinely

are at least in the news. And he most definitely campaigned using a lot of liberal rhetoric, even if his positions weren't as far left as his words made them sound. I had never heard of him until the blogs started tossing his name around shortly before he entered the race. And while I'll grant you that Bernie, Lord love him, is liberal, I don't think Warren is nearly as 'liberal' as people paint her. She's 'to the left' with the rest of America on most issues, but she's not out there screaming for nationalization of the banks or railroads.

I don't see who they've got on the right that's got a shot, really, unless whoever we've got screws up majorly. The most realistic thing they've done is suggest that Romney run again, and as we saw, Republicans can't even be enthusiastic about him. They're still pinning their WH hopes on various forms of disenfranchisement.

[leftynyc]

49. Sen Obama

ELECTRIFIED me with his speech at the Democratic convention in 2004 so he was on my radar for a while but I supported Hillary in the primaries because I thought he was too inexperienced. I agree about Warren - she's not the liberal so many here seem to think (the same way they thought then Sen Obama was). I don't know who they'll serve up in 2016 but I predict the primaries will be quite the circus (again).

[stevenleser]

39. I also love both Warren and Sanders & appreciate them flaws and all. Some can't do that.

Assuming either one was actually elected, and as you noted there would be real difficulties making that happen in the general election for sure, within 12 months, many here who think they are so wonderful would be completely turned off by the decisions they had to make once in office.

The world doesn't present people with very many choices that are clearly marked "Beatific" or "Demonic", certainly not if you are in that position.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

42. I'd be criticizing.

Like I said, I'm a fan of both as people, but the job of the citizen is to push politicians towards actions that are better for the country and the world. And you don't push anyone anywhere by simply adoring them.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

29. We would have more allies in that part of the world

If we supported people's rights to live free from oppression, whether from external or internal forces. Snuggling up to the House of Saud does not endear us to most Saudis, which is possibly why so many of the 9/11 bombers were Saudi nationals. Snuggling up to Bibi likewise pisses off almost everyone else in the region. Our support of Israel should be dependent upon policies that actually promote peace, not try to 'impose' it.

[winter is coming]

30. She should face angry questions. She's wrong on this issue. n/t

[sendero]

33. Wow..

.... where have I heard THIS line of utter bullshit before?

"America has a very special relationship with Israel. Israel lives in a very dangerous part of the world, and a part of the world where there aren't many liberal democracies and democracies that are controlled by the rule of law. And we very much need an ally in that part of the world."

"America has a very special relationship with Israel."

Yes - we send them billions of dollars we cannot afford to give away and they do exactly what they please and basically tell us to sit down and shut up.

"And we very much need an ally in that part of the world."

Israel is an ally to no one, least of all us. They use us to do their dirty work when possible and they take our money, that is the extent of our "alliance".

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

35. From every politician out there?

I believe even Bernie spouts that line.

[sendero]

47. Probably.....

..... just about every politician.

[FrodosPet]

54. What about Vermin Supreme?

We know where he stands on dentistry and free ponies... but what is his Gaza policy?

(I've already did my part by donating a kidney!)

[ncjustice80]

66. We should be sending food and weapons to the oppressed

GAZANS and other Palestinians so they can take back the land the Israelis stole.

[Thinkingabout]

38. Reality comes with knowledge, she probably has more knowledge of the issue

Than the person asking the questions.

[pampango]

40. One strike and you're out, Elizabeth. If you disagree with me on anything you are not a real liberal

I won't support anyone who is not a real liberal. I just won't vote. That will get me what I want.

Or I am going to have to run for president myself. I'm the only person that I agree with 100% of the time.

[CTyankee]

45. Har de har har!

Maybe I could stamp my little foot and hold my breath til I turn purple, too!

[MADem]

43. Not surprising, given the year-round/snowbird population of the

Cape.

[riverwalker]

46. disappointing

Elizabeth Warren finally speaks on Israel/Gaza, sounds like Netanyahu

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/08/28/elizabeth-warren-speaks-israelgaza-sounds-like-netanyahu/



here she literally runs from the question

[Larkspur]

51. I disagree with Warren on this issue, but foreign affairs is not her strength

I also agree with her supporters chastising her on this issue. We all need to chastise our leaders on their blind support of Israel. It only makes matters worse in the Middle East.

However, I would not dump Warren. Her strong stance on domestic and especially progressive economic issues is why I support her and what our country needs to hear right now.

[sadoldgirl]

53. I agree totally with this. n/t

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

65. Foreign Affairs is a gigantic part of any future President's fitness

We're living in an increasingly dangerous world. I agree with you that Warren's credentials on domestic matters are good. But if she continues to show stubborness and intransigence, especially on her incredibly arrogant stance on the settlements, she probably won't get my support. I'm not sure what alternative Dems might crop up, but I wish it could be a candidate who represents the complete package. I expect nothing less for my vote.

[Report1212]

67. What would dumping her imply?

I dont think she's running for anything right now including president

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

55. Our "special relationship" pals murdered civilians because they were near schools.

Kinda like saying we blew up a school full of kids because a gunman might have entered it.

[bullwinkle428]

57. Disappointed, but I'd be an idiot if I said I was shocked.

[MisterP]

61. there was in fact a country that was similarly untouchable: it had a huge air force,

could get 100% of the Senate, used the Holocaust to play down its own genocides, and was never criticized in the media

the country? Trujillo's Dominican Republic

[cpwm17]

70. We don't need any more racist war hawks, like Elizabeth Warren, in Washington DC

Fuck Elizabeth Warren

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/08/28/elizabeth-warren-speaks-israelgaza-sounds-like-netanyahu/

“But when Hamas puts its rocket launchers next to hospitals, next to schools, they’re using their civilian population to protect their military assets. And I believe Israel has a right, at that point, to defend itself,” Warren said, drawing applause.

Warren even rejected a different voter’s suggestion that the U.S. force Israel to at least cease building illegal settlements by withholding further aid: Noreen Thompsen, of Eastham, proposed that Israel should be prevented from building any more settlements as a condition of future U.S. funding, but Warren said, "I think there’s a question of whether we should go that far."

But when Warren has spoken on national security, she has invariably spouted warmed-over, banal Democratic hawk tripe of the kind that she just recited about Israel and Gaza. During her Senate campaign, for instance, she issued wildly militaristic – and in some cases clearly false – statements about Iran and its nuclear program that would have been comfortable on the pages of The Weekly Standard.

Even as conservative Democratic Senate candidates from red states such as Nebraska’s Bob Kerrey were vehemently condemning the threat of war against Iran during their campaigns, Warren was claiming (contrary to the U.S. Government’s own assessment) that “Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons”, adding: “I support strong sanctions against Iran and believe that the United States must also continue to take a leadership role in pushing other countries to implement strong sanctions as well.” Those claims about Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons remained her position even after she was told that they squarely contradict the U.S. intelligence community’s clear assessment of Iran’s actions.