Should we return discussion of the Mideast crisis to the I/P forum?

[Skinner]

As most of you know, we usually require that discussion of the Arab/Israeli conflict take place in the designated Israel/Palestine forum.

Because of the news coming out of the Middle East, we have recently permitted some exceptions to this policy, and have allowed some discussion of the Arab/Israeli conflict in the General Discussion forum.

The DU Admins get the feeling that many members of DU are getting pretty tired of reading flamey threads about this contentious issue here in the General Discussion forum. With this in mind, we propose that we return to our normal policy with regards to these discussions:

1. No more discussion of the current Middle East crisis in the General Discussion forum, or in any other forum where it is not specifically permitted.

2. Discussion of the current Middle East crisis will be permitted in the Israel/Palestine forum, subject to the rules posted in that forum and the discretion of the moderators.

3. New threads will be permitted in the Latest Breaking News forum when the news warrants it, subject to the rules posted in that forum and the discretion of the moderators.

For now, we will defer to the wishes of the DU membership on this issue. But the DU admins reserve the right to unilaterally decide how to handle this issue at any time without member approval.

[burythehatchet]

1. The issue is central to US foreign policy

To relegate it to the basement, isolated from other discussions will inhibit the debate.

[magellan]

6. Second that. (nt)

[tnlefty]

27. I third that! Perhaps with more consolidation of duplicate or related

threads?

Because of the implications that it very well may widen into something bigger than what we're seeing now. It no longer involves Palestine/Israel, and I truly would like to be informed about what is going on.

edited to add: haven't there been some threads in GD/Politics, also? If not, then please disregard this edit, unless of course there were and it would be better to move all discussion in there. :shrug:

[TahitiNut]

52. Correct. It's also Israel/ Lebanon/ Hezbollah/ US/ etc. -- NOT just I/P.

Discussion of US policy and other countries/factions in the Middle East has always been a basis for exception to consgnment to the I/P Forum.

If anything, I'd like to see the I/P Rules (or some sizable subset) applied to the GD/GDP/LBN threads. Allah knows we could use 'em!!!

[Sapphocrat]

73. Exactly.

And Israel can no longer be treated here as a "marginal" issue (for lack of a better word). We (the U.S.) are up to our necks in this mess. We always have been, of course, but recent events make that fact impossible to ignore.

No other nation on the planet has ever been banished to the DU dungeons as Israel has -- I expect for fear of the charges of anti-semitism we are now seeing in GD.

Yet somehow DU continues to weather the most heated discussion -- out in the open, where it belongs -- about every other nation on the planet, including those associated with a specific religious identity (from use of the word "Islamofascism" in reference to Muslim countries, right down to the real meaning of separation of church and state in our own little "Christian nation"), and somehow, DU has survived.

Downthread, someone asks why the subject of Israel is treated with kid gloves. I ask that too.

[darkmaestro019]

80. I'd like to third/fourth/etc that question, about the kid gloves. NT

[Poll_Blind]

120. Agreed. n/t

PB

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

147. Agreed.

[LoZoccolo]

2. The same arguments are being replayed over and over again, so yes. n/t

[GreenArrow]

144. the same arguments on any other hot issue are replayed

over and over again as well. So what's the difference? You don't want to read a thread, don't read it.

[ulysses]

3. I vote to keep the discussion here.

I think it needs to be discussed in a wider venue.

[blonndee]

4. I voted to keep it in GD

but I think that accusations and implications of bigotry ought to be disallowed, just as much as actual or implied bigotry is disallowed. Copycat and flamebait polls and threads also seem to ignite a lot of anger and flame wars.

[Robbien]

5. I believe news stories s/b allowed in LBN since the conflict is current

but further discussions be posted to the I/P forum.

[scarletwoman]

7. Imho, the current situation has many far-reaching implications

regarding U.S. foreign policy as well as domestic politics. My personal take is that this is a situation that merits wide discussion and should not be confined to a subforum.

sw

[ChairmanAgnostic]

44. and this may lead to a world war.

I am not aping those shite-head neocons calling it WWIII, but if Israel bombs Syria (not unlikely) and if it targets Iran (they are pushing us to do it instead) watch oil hit $120 a bbl, and the world economy spin to a hyper-inflationary depression. Given US oil policies and lack of a rational energy R&D policy, I don't see how the neocons in charge would have any other choice but to
a) reward their military suppliers
b) reward their oil company donors.
c) screw the rest of the world.

[kentuck]

8. I would say give it a few more days....

A lot of the discussion has been very informative. Unless, of course, it gets out of hand.

[DanCa]

9. I voted yes (nt)

10. I don't understand why this particular subject

is treated with such kid gloves. There are many topics that people are sensitive to. It seems like a form of censorship, or a pet issue.

[laura888]

70. Agreed whole-heartedly. n/t

[malaise]

11. Keep it in GD

There have been several rational and informative discussions.

[Scurrilous]

12. I think the I/P discussion works better...

...and is conducted in a more civil manner under I/P forum rules.

[blonndee]

13. .

[Lone_Star_Dem]

14. This is a tough one

It's an important issue and a current news story, it also could lead to the US being involved in the not too distant future if the right situations are created. As such I feel we should be able to discuss it among ourselves and try and be respectful of the fact that we don't all see it as a black or white situation.

Maybe we should just have mandatory time-out for those who can't behave as if they're over 12 years old? :think:

[jsamuel]

15. no, it is the most important issue right now

other than maybe iraq

[KoKo]

16. While the MSM and THE WORLD deal with this...we need OPEN FORUMS

to be able to discuss this. It's as if you would have shunted off the Iraq Invasion into some "Iraqi Forum" on DU.

Please keep it open for awhile longer. I know that some must be saying that the posts are "cluttering up GD Forum" but please keep the lines open as long as this CRISIS in LEBANON is still there and the MSM keeps reporting on all of it.

Otherwise you will lose DU'ers who will leave...feeling they have been censured.

I urge you to keep it OPEN...Mods are doing a great job of moving the more "contentious posts" into the "I/P Forum." You've done a great job opening it up and if the Mods can stand the harrassment..please KEEP IT OPEN!!!

Thanks!

[chimpymustgo]

22. Please keep it in GD. It's vital to talk about this.

I would also hope there would be CLEAR and CONSISTENT GUIDELINES for moving someing into I/P.

[Little Star]

17. Keep in GD. To much going on over there right now.

[in_cog_ni_to]

18. YES. Move it out of here.

If people want to discuss Israel/Lebanon/Palestinians they can go to the I/P forum or LBN. I AVOID the I/P forum and it's hard to avoid if it's in your face on GD. JMCPO, of course.:(

[KoKo]

34. It's a "World Crisis" should we ignore what CNN and MSNBC/FAUX are

doing 24/7? Should DU NOT have OPEN DISCUSSIONS of what is the MAIN TOPIC in WORLD AFFAIRS for AMERICANS? Should they "Shut it Down" because it's "too disruptive?"

What about all the DU'ers who are complaining about Libraries being "shut down" becaue they don't agree with Bush and Global Warming..and dialog about the issue from BOTH SIDES? What about those "Fundie Book Burners" that DU'ers are always Posting About? What about all the complaints about Corporatist Censured News" that we here complain about the "M$M" Every Day about?

If Skinner ...et al ..shut down DU about I/P/Lebanese issues isn't that a HUGE FORM OF CENSORSHIP? Why shouldn't we Democrats be VERY CONCERNED about this?

Why shouldn't we? :shrug:

[in_cog_ni_to]

37. He asked a question, I gave my opinion. n/t

[KoKo]

41. Okay...but then where do you stand on "Free Speach and Book Burning"

with your reply which was sort of "dismissive" to concerns of other DU'ers on this particular issue...which is "eating up the MSM Airwaves."

You can't have it "both ways." :-(

[in_cog_ni_to]

57. This issue is a tad different than Free speech and book burning.

Which ALL Liberals support/don't support. No? It's a little more divisive, don't you think? Maybe you don't think that, but I do and it's the very reason I NEVER go to the I/P forum. If people want to discuss it, why not put it in a I/L new forum until it's over? I spend ALL of my time on DU in GD with an occasional daily visit to LBN and GDP. Having these hateful discussion in here changes DU and not for the better, IMO. Maybe being Jewish it touches a different nerve in me than you...don't know. Moving it to a new forum isn't silencing ANYONE. People still get to discuss it. It's not a matter of not letting people discuss it or stifling FREE SPEECH. It's a matter of WHERE they discuss it.

[KoKo]

60. OMG...the "DU...Israeli/Palestinian Forum" is a place like "Gun Dungeon"

that I "NEVER GO TO!" Yet..what you say in your post sends chills of dread to this DU'er:

QUOTE FROM YOU:

Maybe being Jewish it touches a different nerve in me than you...don't know. Moving it to a new forum isn't silencing ANYONE. People still get to discuss it. It's not a matter of not letting people discuss it or stiffling FREE SPEECH. It's a matter of WHERE they discuss it.

Would you "REALLY" give up your Jewish Heritage over the RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH?

I don't believe you would.....I believe that you are just "boasting."

:shrug:

[in_cog_ni_to]

64. boasting?

boasting about what? See? See how these discussions go? Where did I say I wanted to stifle free speech? I suggested a NEW I/L forum. Just like THIS forum, but separate. What is wrong with that? Does that silence anyone? NO. How does a NEW I/L forum (with the same rules as GD) stifle your free speech?

[KoKo]

74. I'm sorry if you were offended............

but can you look into your heart and not see "boating?"

:shrug:

[in_cog_ni_to]

77. Now it's "boating?" not "boasting?"

I wasn't offended and you didn't answer my question about how a I/L forum, with the SAME rules as GD, stifles free speech.

[KoKo]

94. Oh shit! I'm posting while cooking and you get "Off" on me for missing an

"s" in my post. How far do we get into "nitpicking." You call me out for "Boating" typo instead of "Boasting" and I come back at you for not knowing I was cooking Dinner.

Sheesh...isn't this "might be" how the "I/P Wars" started? Am I being over simplistic.... I'm not running this through DU "Spell Check" so bear with me for ALL THE TYPO's.......:eyes:

[Truthiness Inspector]

96. LOL

Maybe it's supposed to be a combination of boasting and showboating? ;)

I agree with you on your stance supporting Israel, but I do think keeping it in GD is a good idea. It's a huge issue that is fracturing many, so it's better to address it head-on instead of sweeping it into the backroom or the fractures won't be worked on and hopefully healed, in my opinion only of course.

[KoKo]

97. Exactly ...why not have a "heads on discussion" considering that Lebanon

is being Bombed back into Stone Age..or a to a stage that will require MEGA HELP with it's INFRASTRUCTURE?

When it was Just IRAQ one could see a need for a seperate "Israli/Palestine
Forum." But, the violence has SPREAD and may go into the WHOLE ME...and there are Lebanese Citizens who hold "dual citizenships" from Many Countries...plus they've been "Invaded Before?"

We need FREE SPEECH about this...and WHY NOT?

[Truthiness Inspector]

102. Well

I don't want to turn this thread into hashing it out while Skinner is trying to take a poll, but I take issue with you failing to mention the violence perpetrated by Hezbollah against Israel, including Hezbollah putting the Lebanese in a treacherous position.

I agree with "igcognito" on the issue and support Israel, I just disagree with him/her on the issue of moving the discussion. Having said that, I won't respond further on this thread so as not to further divert its intention.

[KoKo]

110. I'm not trying to mess with "Skinner's Poll" either...but he didn't say to

us..."No Discussion" on "my poll."

but, I respect what you say...even though I replied...I guess I just wouldn't think Skinner would do a post on his own "FORUM" and not figure there would be "some kind of discussion." But, Ill shut my mouth up and go back to other "Forums" because of what you say.

[tnlefty]

93. But maybe some of us, me in particular, need to understand why the

discussion is so offensive, and why it sets off different nerves. I've read some of your posts about how your son has been mistreated in school and I have to wonder do you really think that even those of us who disagree with the policies of the Israeli govt. wouldn't be right there with you to defend your son and you?

I'll admit that I offered refuge after 9/11 to a man (Palenstinian) in a county closeby because he was receiving death threats regarding him, his wife, and their then 6 month old baby. This is during the time that mosques were being reported vandalized, burned to the ground, etc. and men in this country were being rounded up. Do you honestly think that this wouldn't be extended to you and your family, also? And yes, I understand as much as I know and can that there are elements in our society and elsewhere who don't like 'Jews" just because they seem to feel that they can. Can we not discuss this also?

Do you truly believe that those of us in the bible belt don't go to bat for Jewish children in schools when we see an unfair situation? I've done it. I have a friend who almost lost her position as chair of the English Dept. in school because she stood up for a Jewish male, valedictorian of his class, who merely requested that if there was going to be a prayer during the service if he could also include a Jewish prayer. This set off a major firestorm.

But, I think what I'm asking and I'll admit with less tact and grace than I would prefer; if we can't discuss these issues and come to understand each other how in the hell will we ever effect change?

[H2O Man]

19. No.

While the quality of some of the discussions may have some unfortunate low points -- on both sides -- the majority of the threads belong in GD. Few are about Israeli-Palestinian issues per say. Far more are about Israel and Lebanon, as well as US policy in the Middle East. This includes the possibility that violence could soon spill over into Syria and Iran; that neoconservatives are advocating US military involvement; and issues that are directly related to the US aggression in Iraq.

[IChing]

35. I agree H2O Man, If Israel gets out of Lebanon and a cease fire ensues

then move it back to the I/P forum.

The point that I see is that this is a NeoCon strategy to continue this madness until the fall election to build up fear on the voters for a support for the pResident's "war on terror election tactic.

Condi is going to the middle east next week?
What about 2 weeks ago?

[KoKo]

76. Condi's WISH is for nothing more than a "Cease Fire" to pull her and her

Neo/Con Professors/Guru's outta their TOTAL SUPPORT for BUSH/NEO/CON/PNAC'ers."

I dont mean to be "harsh" about "Condi" but isn't she a sorry excuse for a "Secretry of State for US Government?"

How "low can one go?" Karen Hughes Representing our Government ...just because she went to Kidergarten with the Chimp back in TEXAS?

How far are we "TAXPAYERS" being asked to GO with the BUSH NEPOTISM? Including "Big Foot" Karen Hughes who probably spends more on "footware" than "Mz Condi at Saks?" Karen would say she shops at "Off Price Brand Stores" wheras Condi shops at "SAKS." "Karen Huge" wears as over a size 10 and she needs "special shops" whereas Condi is a Petite..needing at most a SIZE 7!

[G_j]

148. agree, the 'lowpoints' in the discussion should not

result in one of the most serious and dangerous events of the present day being put on the 'back page'.
This is far too important.

[bloom]

20. I think that the rules are too tight - in some ways in the I/P forum.

You have to start with an article, for instance - you can't just start out saying what you think - writing your own essay.

I think it's nice when people can't be going around labeling people as anti-semitic, however.

On the other hand - I think that a progressive board ought to be deleting threads that are posts of right-winger propagandists like Alan Dershowitz - as if he is now a reasonable source.


Also - a lot of things don't fit neatly into a category - like posts from Lebanon and Syria. It is I/P and it's NOT I/P.


Maybe you ought to have a Middle East Forum and just not have so tight of rules. (But keep out the right-wingers as legitimate POVs).

[muriel_volestrangler]

49. I'd pretty much second all of bloom's points

We need looser guidelines than those in I/P - we can't base the discussions we need to have purely on existing articles. If you want to move the threads out of GD, then the I/P forum needs relaxing - and a namechange (temporary?) would be good for that, to make it clear that Lebanon issues are menat to be there too.

Personally, I don't see the problem with the threads bing in GD, so I've voted that way.

[babylonsister]

21. I also think it should stay here for the time being until hopefully

things settle down.

[mmonk]

23. GD for awhile until we learn how this is going to affect us

especially since we're a cheerleader instead of an intermediary. It relates to too many countries which makes it different than an Israeli/Palestinian stand alone issue.

[DeepModem Mom]

24. I'd like it moved out of GD. nt

[sweetheart]

25. Ontology of framing

I say this issue is core to our problems, and by naming it off in to a sepsarate discussion hell,
we deny ourselves the real ground of the complexity to have a broad and unfettered discussion
about the greater foreign policy picture.

I support fewer discussion forums, rather a more complex format for GD that would allow a
multidimensional key structure for discussions, something a database should be able to handle...
Too many branches on the tree reduce our ability to interdiscuss, IMO, and it all comes down
to the ontology of the software, that IP is a separate discussion is "us" collectively admitting
we are unable to handle a core issue... in denial, it will forever plague us, i say keep the
discussions here here in GD, and GDP if we must have it.

[alcibiades_mystery]

26. No way

This is one of the top issues in the world right now, if not the key issue. It needs to be in GD. It is hard policing the vitriol, to be sure. Perhaps some creative thread combining in GD can shrink the bloat?

[kpete]

28. Keep it in GD

This is the most important story right now and we can learn from each other, whether we agree or not.

Flame's are nothing compared to what the people of Israel and Lebanon are going through right now.

We can handle it.

[chill_wind]

132. Absolutely agree with you. n/t

[K8-EEE]

29. I Don't Like When Posts Get Moved To I/P & Then LockedThere

That's annoying -- posts get moved and then the moderators at I/P think of some reason to lock them. They have a gazillion rules over there I guess.

I find it all unnecessary. I have strong views on the subject but don't mind reading others' views as well, and of course if you're really tired of it you can just stay away from those threads.

[jonnyblitz]

126. exactly. it gets moved to I/P then once there, there is a rule

against it, and it gets locked.

[Zhade]

30. Absolutely not. It's cowardly to hide it away.

I'm NOT calling you a coward by saying that - my point is that it's an issue we will eventually have to face, and hiding it in the basement is taking the easy way out.

Witness the amount of flat-out WRONG "facts" about the whole situation some bring up that sound like they come right out of a rightwing think tank - there is stunning ignorance of the historical and political reality of this issue.

The rest of the world talks about it, we do ourselves a disservice to not discuss it. Yes, the discussion is volatile, but in the long run it's probably healthier to deal with it in the light of day.

[MADem]

31. The fighting in LEBANON has NOTHING to do with PALESTINE

It has everything to do with Hiz'bAllah, it has everything to do with IRAN, and it has everything to do with the nascent government of Lebanon...but why shove it into a forum for PALESTINIAN issues?

If you wanted to start up an ISRAEL-LEBANON forum, just for events surrounding this business, that would work, but personally, I think this is world news, first, and has nothing to do with Palestine, second, beyond the fact that some Palestinians, angry at Israel and with no small amount of justification, are getting some grim satisfaction out of the events.

Though people are desperately anxious to make a tight connection between the sunni Filistines and those heretical shi'as up north, it just does not exist. Their views on faith are diametrically opposed to one another. They may put out the odd "message of solidarity" but they aren't working together in any substantive fashion.

[6000eliot]

40. All the fighting in the ME has SOMETHING to do with Palestine.

But I agree with you to a point, so I voted "no."

[MADem]

47. IRAN called the shots on this Lebanon evolution, but I take your point

They chose the date, the time, and the method. This was all about disrupting the G8 discussions on Iran's nuke program, and shifting the debate back to middle east instability and how it's all Israel's fault.

Plus, Iran got a LOT of their newest, just-tweaked rockets tested against the day that they arm one with a tactical nuke.

Sure, they can pretend it has something to do with Palestine, in desperate effort to ally themselves with an established resistance, but even if every blessed Filistine packed up, said screw this sandbox, and moved to Kenya, happily, there would still be a move to 'push those Jews into the sea'--it's in the charters of all these militias/resistance outfits/terror gangs to so do. It's also in the speeches in the Iranian majlis every other day.

When Jordan, Egypt, AND Saudi Arabia say that Hizb'Allah was OUT OF LINE in attacking Israel from Lebanon, that's saying something.

[High Plains]

75. Can you actually point me to any evidence that Iran micro-

managed the seizing of the Israeli soldiers?

[MADem]

133. And only that PRECISE level of micromanagement will satisfy you?

Not this level? Supplying military hardware and training, that's not enough for you, eh:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/07/20/world/main1821335.shtml
Israeli officials have claimed — and defense and Middle East analysts in Washington agree — that Hezbollah's arsenal has increased in both size and range, with help from Iran...."Three things are new," said John Pike, the director of GlobalSecurity.org. "The longer range of the rockets, Hezbollah firing them in far larger numbers and the cruise missile that they hit the Israeli ship with."

Hezbollah is suspected of having as many as 13,000 short-range artillery rockets — referred to as Katyusha rockets — which Pike says can be set up quickly and fired remotely. These low-tech weapons have a range of roughly 12 miles and are generally inaccurate.

But rockets that hit cities deeper into Israel, like the ones that killed eight people in Haifa, are suspected of being a newer version of the Katyusha — most likely the Iranian-made mid-range Fajr-3 and Fajr-5.

Nor this, authorizing use of long range weapons: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/738747.html
IDF: Residents from Tel Aviv northward to 'be alert'
Rockets strike Afula, Jezreel Valley for first time; Hezbollah: We can hit anywhere
... Hezbollah secretary general Hassan Nasrallah may decide to use the longer range missiles in his movement's arsenal against Israel, according to Israel Defense Forces assessments.

IDF sources say that use of such weapons will depend on authorization from Iran, which has equipped Hezbollah with long-range missiles and has played a formative role in shaping the character of the current fighting. If the confrontation continues to escalate, as it appeared to have done Sunday, the chances that Nasrallah's organization will launch such missiles increases.

The army is concerned that Iranian-made Zelzal missiles, whose range is estimated to exceed 200 kilometers, may be used, thus allowing Hezbollah to target the Tel Aviv metropolitan area. Intelligence information suggests that the organization has a limited number of these missiles.

The IDF on Sunday told Israelis from Tel Aviv northward to "be alert."

And then, there's THIS: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,19838223-31477,00.html

Iranian missile explodes from truck
Martin Chulov, Beirut
July 19, 2006
A LONG-RANGE Iranian-made missile capable of reaching Israel's leading city, Tel Aviv, launched skyward from a bombed truck convoy east of Beirut before crashing to earth, Lebanese military officials have confirmed.
After initially suspecting the spiralling fireball was a downed Israeli warplane, officials now believe it was evidence of the most serious threat to Israel's main cities yet to emerge in the week-long conflict.

"No Israeli aircraft has been hit over Beirut. All of the air force planes and helicopters have been accounted for," an army spokesman said.

The Zilzal missile has a much bigger warhead than those that have rained down on northern Israel for the past week, and an advanced guidance system. It exploded after a convoy of trucks travelling over a mountain pass into south Beirut was attacked by an F-16 jet. ...



And read this charming interview by an Aussie with the former VP of Iran--any confusion you might have about their stance towards Israel is cleared up for you here:
http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2006/s1692439.htm

MARK COLVIN: But hold on, Hezbollah is not a government, it has a couple of ministers in a government ...

MASSOUMEH EBTEKAR: Exactly ...

MARK COLVIN: But Hezbollah's armed forces are a militia, which according to UN resolution was supposed to be disarmed some time ago.

MASSOUMEH EBTEKAR: They wield a lot of support in our country, they are part of the government, they are supported and they have the right to all sorts of activity political and ...

MARK COLVIN: But I'm not asking about the political activity, I'm asking about the military activity.

MASSOUMEH EBTEKAR: Also defending Lebanon, they had an important role in ousting of the Israeli forces, I think that was about three years ago ...

MARK COLVIN: It was about three years ago, isn't it time that Lebanon let its own army defend itself rather than a militia belonging to a religious party.

MASSOUMEH EBTEKAR: That's exactly for the Lebanese people to decide, exactly, they should decide the future, but I think ...

MARK COLVIN: But how can they decide it if Iran is pumping arms into Hezbollah?

MASSOUMEH EBTEKAR: I think that that's not the question... (what they all say when they can't answer!).

Let's not stop there, let's see what nations in the region think:
Finally, it seems, Iran has overplayed its hand
By Youssef Ibrahim
The attempt by Hezbollah and Hamas to drag the whole Arab world into their war with Israel in the past two weeks has drawn flak in the form of Arab public opinion that neither militant jihadist organizations anticipated.
Speaking in an unusually blunt tone, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and Bahrain openly rejected what they described as unilateral "adventurism," telling both groups that they are on their own vis-à-vis Israel. More important, indications are surfacing that a long-silent Arab majority has had enough of being hijacked by extremists in its midst.

In a meeting of its 22 foreign ministers Saturday in Cairo, the League of Arab States did not mince words. "Behavior undertaken by some groups in apparent safeguarding of Arab interests does in fact harm those interests, allowing Israel and other parties from outside the Arab world (read Iran) to wreak havoc with the security and safety of all Arab countries." .... The latest outburst in Gaza and Lebanon was particularly alarming to the Sunni Muslim public, as it so transparently bears the imprints of Iran and its Shiite mullahs. This is disconcerting because the Persian nemesis is historically viewed in the region as a neighbor with imperialist ambitions. In pushing its immediate proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas, to engage Israel now, Iran reached ever further to set the Arab world's agenda of war and peace by advancing its own agenda to confront the West, Israel included. To be sure, Syria acts as Iran's Sunni agent in the Arab world, supplying access to Iranian arms and material and feeding the cycle of violence. It is working hand-in-glove to accommodate Iran's regional strategy.

For centuries, Sunnis dominated the Muslim world. That began to change in 1979, when the Iranian Shiite mullahs' revolution led to an astonishing ascent of what King Abdullah of Jordan last year decried as a menacing "Shiite crescent" rising above the Sunni Muslim Arab world. Similar alarm was voiced by President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt and indeed by Saudi Arabia, the mother of all Sunni regimes. In Iraq, the two sects are engaged in a bloody massacre of one another.....Ironically, Hamas and Hezbollah's provocation of Israel, coupled with the Jewish state's retaliation, might have opened a new chapter in the greater Middle East discourse — but not the one these groups anticipated. Perhaps the time has come in which war for war's sake might not just bring condemnation from the world at large, but from the Arab world as well.

More on these lines, here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/norm-ornstein/what-to-watch-in-the-midd_b_25513.html

So what is going on here? For the Saudis, the Egyptians and the Jordanians, Iran is a bigger threat by far to the survival of their regimes than Israel-- and Hezbollah is not only a wholly-owned subsidiary of Iran, but an agent working to undermine them as well. Hezbollah or its surrogates have supported the Islamic Brotherhood in Egypt, allied with anti- Saudi extremist fundamentalist factions in Saudi Arabia, and agitated against the King in Jordan. Iran's radical fundamentalist regime wants to spread its version of revolution and to cement Iran's role as the dominant player in the region.

Of course, this does not mean a new alliance in the Middle East, with the Saudis suddenly finding virtue in Israel. But it does suggest that the rash move by Hezbollah, its patron Iran and its enabler Syria to try to damage Israel at a vulnerable moment may create new dynamics in the region. The Europeans may be blind to the dangers posed by Iran and its posse. A whole lot of people who live in their neighborhood are not. If Israel is successful at doing major damage to Hezbollah in the coming days and weeks, there will be a lot of grateful people not normally associated with glee at Israeli military success.

[Ignoramus]

32. We can't agree to disagree about what is essentially a deal breaker

Do you support collective punishment or not. If you do, you are an authoritarian and I can't be united with you.

On the other hand, this is "democratic" underground, and the official policy of the democrats is to favor Israel and in fact to favor discrimination based on whether you are jewish or not within that region. So, maybe they will say I'm not allowed here because I don't agree to support such bias.

[Spazito]

33. I voted to keep it in GD, with the exception of some deliberate, imo

flame-bait threads on each side of the issue, by far I have found the posts to be very educational posts covering all sides of the issue. The current crisis has such potentially far-reaching consequences, it is important to be able to discuss this outside of the I/P forum, imo.

[Midlodemocrat]

36. I would like to see the threads on the current ME conflict remain

in GD. For me, personally, I don't visit I/P very often and I have learned a great deal about this particular situation from some very impassioned posters.

I think threads which are specifically about the Israeli/Palestinian situation could continue to be moved to I/P, but I think this particular situation warrants a larger forum.

[ismnotwasm]

38. I was going to vote yes

But as someone else pointed else, this situation has been direct relationship to US foreign policy and is relevant and important to keep aware of. I believe, at least for right now it needs to stay. Even though the discussions get very ugly, and people are hurting over differences of opinion, good points get brought up as well. So I changed my vote. Maybe you could revisited the issue if the situation becomes a bit more stable? If it becomes any more volatile than it already is since it's such as sensitive issue, I'll happily change my vote.

I very carefully stay out of most of those threads although I read most of them.

[Behind the Aegis]

39. Move it to I/P.

However, relax the rule about not starting a thread without a recent article. Allow posts that allow questions, statements, what have you.

Also, as someone else said, right-wing hacks, like Pat Buchanan, should not be allowed, especially when linked to an anti-gay, anti-choice, right-wing site, no matter if they have a current opinion that some DU'ers like.

Whereas it is against the rules to call someone an anti-Semite, I propose it also be against the rules to suggest that is what a poster is saying or a group of us are doing because we disagree with what has been written! Just as a person who does not agree with Israel is not always an anti-Semite, a poster who does agree with Israel is not always accusing someone of anti-Semitism because we don't agree with them. Also, calling us neo-cons, warmongers, and the like, I thought that was supposed to be against the rules?

Finally, if it does get moved to I/P, please allow other moderators to actually delete things in that room when an alert is sent. Lithos and UGRR are not on 24/7 and it is not good to have some things I have seen up for 24 hours.

If it is not moved to I/P, then any post about the current conflict should only be about THAT conflict. The moment I/P comes into the discussion the post should either be deleted or sent to I/P. Anything about Israel that does not have to do with the conflict, should not be moved to I/P because malcontents decide they are going to raid the thread with hateful anti-Israeli propaganda, just delete they posts.

Those are my suggestions.

[KoKo]

48. You know...haven't we gotten past point of "Semite/Anti-Semite? Could

we move to SAVING OUR PLANET FOR ALL OF US?

As long as we stay bogged down in the MSM and our "Past Loyalties" we can't move forward. And what has "staying loyal to the past" done for CIVILIZATION all these thousands of years.....all these Thousands of years.

If one cannot DISCUSS then what does that mean?

[Behind the Aegis]

53. this is not a discussion thread.

If you want to discuss whether these threads go to I/P or not, start a thread, but kindly let those with whom you disagree have an opinion!

[boston bean]

55. yes you are right.....maybe you should take

your own advice.

[jonnyblitz]

136. no kidding....i guess he can discuss but nobody else can

:eyes:

[MADem]

That forum is not conducive, you cannot even post a picture there!!!

And if you come in to a thread from the LATEST page, you don't see the rules stickied to the top of the forum, which is an invitation to unintentional violation of the rules, especially for those who do not go there regularly.

I have visions of moderators going batshit...

[norml]

139. See who supports the I/P Forum system?

Only one side supports the I/P Forum system, and they are a vocal minority.

It's those with their fingers ever on the alert button, getting threads and posts removed.

It's those who don't want discussion of anything they don't like, and work to get all traces of such discussions removed.

It's the cowardly bullies, who because they fear any honest and open debate, they only want to shut you up any way they can.

I'm so glad the I/P Forum system has broken down.

It makes it so much harder for them to keep track of, control by way of restrictive rules, hit alert, and get removed every post on this issue of which they don't approve.

Can you guess which side I'm talking about?

[chimpymustgo]

140. Excellent observation. Sunshine is disinfectant.

Let's not run away...we need to talk about this - honestly and openly.

[robbedvoter]

42. Move it - except for LBN stories that qualify

I suppose we cannot ignore major developments - but the rest of it, I'd rather not need all the time.

[I_Make_Mistakes]

43. Generally, I agree with moving it to I/P which is a room that I don't

go to, however, right now, it is in the fore-front of all the worlds mind and should be discussed openly and frankly.

[KoKo]

56. Your post belies it's true intent which is FEEDOM OF DISCUSSION while

we have 25,000 Lebanese Americans trapped. But one does need to ask: "How many were "trapped in New Orleans" under circumstances that they had NO CONTROL OVER! A "NATIONAL DISASTOR!"

But it will take a "Build Up" of these travesties for most Americans to SEE and Internalize WHAT THE FUCK has happened to them under the BUSH REGIME....

Famous Quote: "You don't see It Coming till it's Taken You Over!"

I don't know who said this ...but it sort of rings true..............:shrug:

[Lars39]

62. I think a lot of people don't go to the I/P forum.

Resulting in a whole segment of DU that is not 'on top of things' concerning I/P issues(and I'm including myself in that category,too).
I think this result hurts DU in the long run.

[Marie26]

45. I vote no

It's the most important news story in the world right now.

[LeahD]

131. Ditto. n/t

[sandnsea]

46. Israel/Lebanon/Hezbollah

If you can move any Israel/Palestine or anti-Zion or that sort of thing to I/P forum - and just leave threads that deal directly with Lebanon and the border and buffer zone, maybe that would work. I don't think we need a cazillion threads a day about who killed more people since 1948, but we should be able to discuss the military action and conditions in Lebanon itself.

[knowbody0]

50. dialog, we NEED dialog

for the first time in DU history. we are asking questions we were not permitted to ask.

if we cannot have this dialog here on this safe forum, how can we hope for world peace?

Skinner, you are amazingly awesome

[Just Me]

51. No. Please, no no no. This subject is CENTRAL to policy discussion.

Please, PLEASE do not send it to the basement.

Please.

[Canuckistanian]

54. To I/P if a post disintegrates to the same old argument.

I know I'm tired of it.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

59. There's an idea

When it's obvious that the intention of the OP was just to poke other posters with a sharp stick, and not to engage in any sort of intelligent, adult conversation send the thread to IP.

This is easy for me to say, however, since I'm not a mod and wouldn't have to deal with the extra strain.

[Canuckistanian]

66. And somebody would be angry with the decision

*sigh*

[ComerPerro]

58. I don't think you can keep it there, Skinner. Its on everyone's minds

[Catherine Vincent]

61. I vote keep it in GD for now.

n/t

[KoKo]

63. It's a "safe place" and causes "no harm to anyone" so...why not? n/t

[reprehensor]

65. Keep it in GD and add in 9/11 too. n/t

[uppityperson]

67. Keep it in GD, maybe GDME? Mods are doing good, thanks

It would be nice if there were rules as to calling each other names and just flaming. Keep it in GD for a bit more, deleted questionable posts without having to agonize over them. And thank you.

[Bluerthanblue]

68. it is important news- it shouldn't be hidden away-

nor should we hold it in a position of 'revrence' or 'shame'-
But speak out honestly and freely-

imo

but I understand how difficult it must be to moderate this-
and I thank you for your professionalism.

[mantis49]

69. It's too important right now to keep it confined to the

Israel/Palestine forum.

[Crunchy Frog]

71. I'm in favor of keeping it in GD for right now.

Like it or not, it is at center stage and is the dominant news story right now. The I/P forum seems too restrictive to deal with such an important current event.

I feel bad about the people here who are so intensely emotionally invested in one side or another that the current dialogue here is painful, but I still feel it's an issue that deserves to be fully open to discussion by the entire DU community.

[Peace Patriot]

72. Yep, keep it open! I think we're looking at Bushite/PNAC-Plan B:

get Israel to do it.

Very important to discuss this openly, and understand it. Saw a poll today here that 84% of the American people oppose U.S. participation in a widened Mideast war. With that level of opposition to Bush junta foreign policy--and opposition also from Europe, Russia and China--how can they get the PNAC agenda of invading and occupying all Mideast countries and controlling their oil fields accomplished? Answer: Plan B. Get Israel to kick it off (with a wholly insane bombing of Beirut, and who knows what next?), then, in the chaos, manufacture, or take advantage of, some "Gulf of Tonkin"-type incident to justify protecting "U.S. interests" or military groups/installations. Bang, we're in! And Bush doesn't have to justify it--he just escalates and escalates.

I think it's very important to understand the power situation between the Bush junta and the Israeli leadership. The Bush junta has all of the power to fund or not fund Israeli defense and aggression, and, further, without Bushite support, Israel would be very isolated right now. It has almost no other support in the world. Israel's current war actions could not be taking place without full Bush junta support, and, although Israeli leadership is certainly gung-ho in carrying out the PNAC scenario (and has made a "pact with the Devil" (the Bush junta), as far as I'm concerned), I wonder about Israel as a country and its people. Are they as powerless as we are, to determine government policy and set a course that is in their best interest?

I think behind it all are war profiteers (oil giants, arms manufacturers, military contractors). And the politicians are just their tools. The war profiteers and their puppets in our governments are driving both countries (in the case of the U.S., almost entirely against the will of its people, and in the case of Israel, I'm not sure--but suspect the same) into a conflagration that could literally end the world. (Read Carl Sagan's "The Cold and the Dark," on the impact to our atmosphere of even a limited nuclear exchange).

They both seem out of control, and mad (insane type mad)--these two governments, Israel more understandably than our own. (Ours is mad with greed.) But in truth, they are following an agenda (PNAC). The madness part (besides slaughtering innocents and breaking international laws) is that it's a plan that could easily escalate into all out war, with unknown consequences--the least of which may be blowback on our civilian populations. I don't see any of this in any way making Israel "safer"--nor us. It's a power game that we, the people, have no say in.

But I think it's VERY important to how who's in charge--and I don't think it's Israel (despite their actions). Ask yourself this: If Israel did not exist, and the Israel lobby did not exist, would the Bush Cartel still be after the Mideast oil fields? I think there is no question that the answer is yes. In that case, what is Israel except a pawn in their game plan--one that they would abandon in a minute, if it suited them, just as they abandoned poor blacks in New Orleans to rot and die. The Bush Cartel's real buds are the Saudi sultans and the bin Ladens, not Israel. I think the Israeli leaders have made an extremely unfortunate and dangerous choice of allies.

So I think in the matter of condemnation for war crimes, and the critical need of their removal from power, the Bush junta comes first. They are the most culpable and they are our responsibility.

We have almost no chance of removing the Bush junta from power, given the control that Bushite corporations now have over our election results (brought about by the "Help America Vote Act" coup, engineered by Tom Delay, Bob Ney and Christopher Dodd--which resulted in the 2002-2004 nationwide conversion to electronic voting, whereby all votes are "counted" with TRADE SECRET, PROPRIETARY programming code, owned and entirely controlled by corporations with close ties to the Bush junta, and with virtually no audit/recount controls.)

Our first step toward removing the Bush junta must be restoring transparent elections. Difficult job. My proposal for the '06 elections is massive Absent Ballot voting--a citizen boycott of the rigged election machinery. AB voting is not safe, but it IS a PROTEST against the machines. If it gets big enough (it's up to 50% in Los Angeles), it would made all these shiny, new, election theft machines obsolete, and throw corrupt election officials into a panic. What good is all this vote rigging equipment, if no one will use it? Then we start reforming the election system. (It's kind of like how the Montgomery bus boycott worked to end segregation--except that, in this case, we MUST vote--but not on these machines.)

[Peace Patriot]

87. Sorry to be so rambling, but I wanted to make the point that the current

crisis--Israel bombing Beirut (and possibly invading Lebanon and other countries)--is intimately connected to Bush junta foreign policy and the coming elections. I suspect the Bush junta INSTIGATED this conflict. It wouldn't surprise me in the least to find out that they have operatives in Hezbolla for that purpose. They're the ones who created and funded Al Qaeda, remember. Their purpose is WAR PROFITEERING. Israel's leaders may be driven by war profiteers (or by their need for Bushite financial support), but they are equally driven by survival and what they think they need to do for the sake of their survival. I think they couldn't be more wrong. But I'm not there, under threat of hostile neighbors. I'm HERE. And THIS is what I'm responsible for--and what all of us Americans are responsible for: the Bush junta and its removal from power.

They've already got their pre-written election narrative, for use after the election in "explaining" their surprising victory. The "crisis in Lebanon" (and wherever else) will now be added to Americans' hatred of gays, brown immigrants and Arabs, as the brilliant Rovian hate issues that account for their mysterious retention of Congress. (What a P.R. genius, that guy!) Israel is just a talking point to them. Power to steal is what they are about--and power to cover up how much they are stealing, via their new control over vote counting. And our jobs is to throw as big a monkey wrench into this phony election crap as we can. I think Absentee Ballot voting is the biggest monkey wrench we can throw--cuz everybody can do it.

So, yeah, keep in GD! This is an ELECTION ISSUE--whether we want it to be or not!

[chimpymustgo]

90. Wow, Peace Patriot. You should post this as a separate thread. PNAC

Plan B.

[AntiFascist]

112. Actually, I think we should be staying out of Israel's business...

who am I to judge what intelligence is used and what has spurred them to make the military decisions that are made? I'm somewhat torn on the issue of moving the debate out of GD because I think now is the time to really focus on election fraud as well.

But, as long the Bush Admin and its following (led by Faux News) are taking this as an opportunity to advance the PNAC agenda, then this subject deserves to be front page material for as long as that game is played.

[KoKo]

78. "Poll and NOT the Discussion" wil decide the DU ISSUE...Hope all

of you VOTE!

[nashville_brook]

79. tired of flamey threads in GD?

that's why the admins would shut down discussion of what is looking to be WW3?

[conflictgirl]

81. I do wish there weren't quite so many of them here

I'm open to discussing them here, but it has seemed at several points during the past few days that at least half of the threads in GD are somehow related to the Israel situation (many of them seemingly started for the express purpose of being snarky). I understand that it's an important foreign policy issue, but it's not the only thing I want to discuss right now and weeding through a million other threads to find the non-ME ones is sometimes challenging.

[laura888]

85. Ummmmm.... ask anyone on the street and they will say....

..."I'm afraid that World War III has started." It's the only topic of relevance.

[conflictgirl]

89. I respectfully disagree

Bush's veto of the stem cell bill (his first veto) is a very big issue too, in my opinion.

Also, I completely believe that the WWIII talk is really trumped up by talking heads on the various cable news programs. It could *become* WWIII depending on how various nations play their cards, but this is not the first time that fighting has broken out regarding this situation and it hasn't led to a world war (though it was claimed before that it was the start of a world war). I really think that the developing situation is potentially worrisome and bears watching, but I've been lurking/posting here for almost 2 years and I don't recall seeing 40 percent of the threads devoted to other situations like Sudan, for example.

I DO think we should be discussing it, and a lot of people in other venues outside DU are indeed discussing it as well. But at this point it's starting to seem like the discussions here are becoming just another place to argue over which side you're on. Considering that it's a hot issue in which there are many people who disagree, looking for consensus or continuing to arge about it here isn't likely to produce much that's worthwhile.

I don't know about you, but I don't see how threads of "ugh, there are so many anti-Semites here, I can't participate at DU if it's like this" or "how can you possibly think it was okay to take away the Palestinians' land in the first place" are really covering new ground each time a new variation of the same thing is posted.

[conflictgirl]

86. Holy crap! There are about 30 threads out of 78 on the front page of GD

That's 30/78 posts that are related at least somehow to the Israel situation, not counting the "stickies" or this thread.

That's almost 40 percent!

No wonder I thought it seemed like a ton of them.

[burythehatchet]

107. I think this is a result of the topic having been

"banished" for so long. I'm sure this will subside in due time, like every other hot topic.

[norml]

149. The excitement of saying what was forbidden will die down

once people get used to it, and know that it won't be taken away.

Until people know that this freedom will not be taken away, there may be an attitude among many of getting in what they can, while they can.

[liberalpragmatist]

82. Why don't we change one of the GD forums to specifically ME-stuff for now?

We've done that at other times of high traffic. Maybe the topic isn't big enough right now to justify that, but it's something I think should be considered.

[NNN0LHI]

83. I have learned over the years to trust your judgment on this stuff

Its your call. And I can live with it no matter what your decision is.

Take care and see you later.

Oops, almost forgot. Thank you all for hosting the greatest political website on the web.

Don

[ourbluenation]

84. I for one cannot take the fighting over there, let alone here. PLease...

for the love of god...please move these discussion out of the GD.

[bridgit]

88. no, I/P mods are not able to allow the level of discussion per se...

required...imo of course

[NuttyFluffers]

117. 2nd that opinion

at some point a wound needs exposure to air (open discussion) and sterilization (truth). banishment fosters festering -- the last thing we need at this time.

[bridgit]

121. there it is, cheers friend...

great allegorical flow-chart too :toast:

[Dark]

91. Maybe make one GD for it and the other exclude it. Like w/ Plame.n/t

[CabalPowered]

152. That's what I was thinking. n/t

[NMDemDist2]

92. while there's a shooting war, it should be in GD IMO n/t

[newyawker99]

95. kick

:kick:

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

98. Do what you think is best, just don't take away the HIDE THREAD feature

So many OPs on a hot topic come off like someone trying to shout over the crowd at a noisy bar. "Hey I got something to say everybody listen!" So you give him/her the courtesy of listening and discover it's just the same old shit. No new info, no new insights, nothing but the shouting that just attracts more shouting and flaming.

That's why I love Hide This Thread. If you decide to continue allowing Mideast discussion in General Discussion, I will be wearing out that particular feature.

[Blue_Tires]

99. no...

at least not for now as long as it is world news on the front page every day

[in_cog_ni_to]

100. Make a NEW I/L forum with the SAME rules as GD.

That stifles no one, yet leaves GD free for other discussions.

[Jack Rabbit]

101. For the time being, leave it in GD

However, the I/P rules should apply.

If people want to discuss this issue, they should learn to do so civilly. Thou shalt not call thy fellow DUers Zionist running dogs or anti-Semitic pigs.

[KoKo]

103. I haven't seen stuff like that...and I'm here most all the time..Maybe it

"Dwells" in the "I/P Forum/Dungeon" where everything was put before the "Cat got outta the Hat?"

:shrug:

[burythehatchet]

104. might also consider a foreign policy forum

and include it in the "big" forums, not a group.

[liberal N proud]

105. This issue is going to have an effect on the elections this fall

We need to keep everyone as up to date on this as possible, when posted in the I/P forum, most will not see the info.
It is one of those things that needs to be in front of many people to keep them informed.

[KoKo]

109. Yes...it could be a "tipping point" on many issues....An "issue for Fall"

most definitely "Political." :shrug:

[mzteris]

106. How about on GD

only people who "don't take sides" can post on this topic.

Everyone else go to the Israel forum and the separate (but equal) Palestine forum.



sorta, kinda, a little, almost but not quite - :sarcasm:

[Jacobin]

108. Its what's happening in the world today

It would make GD irrelevant.

Its hard, and its painful, but it is thought provoking and we all need to understand what the other side is doing, saying, feeling, to get this hashed out.

This will be a very very difficult time. But it needs to somehow get to a point where it can be discussed, if not agreed upon.

I hope we are capable of that, but it will be asking a lot. Emotions are extremely high on all sides

[DoYouEverWonder]

111. The conflict in the ME is the major news event at the moment

To relegate all discussion of the conflict back to the I/P Dungeon would be the equivalent of sticking our heads in the sand. I would only do that if you want to take DU from being one of the most important forums on the Internet to being irrelevant and surreal. It would be like trying to ignore the elephant in the room by pretending it's not there.

[CuteNFuzzy]

113. What is the difference?

[LincolnMcGrath]

114. I think it would be consistant with DU's policies.

[JackNewtown]

115. Move discussion to I/P, but allow posts in LBN

We have too much of this on the GD forum. Free discussion about the current crisis should be allowed in I/P, though. The rule that prevents people from posting threads discussing the issue on their own should be waived for now.

[Cleita]

116. No!

As hateful as some of the language is at this moment it is really educational and I think saner and more informed minds will prevail in the end, just like has happened with many other hot and flamable issues.

[PassingFair]

118. Current activities should be noted and discussed.

But the threads must be "policed" to ensure
that the usual suspects don't start in on
each other. BORING!

Take your sectarian oneupmanship back to
the dungeon, please!

[Jazz2006]

119. How about limiting the NUMBER of threads on the same topic to

keep GD from being a long list of M.E. threads and nothing else?

Some kind of designated thread or something, which can be locked and a new one started when it gets too huge?

I sure don't like seeing 100 threads on GD all about the same topics, but I can understand why people want to keep the subject in GD. So, just a thought as a compromise.

Edit: grammatical error.

[ConsAreLiars]

122. Is it possible to just move "some" threads to I/P?

"Some" threads seem to amount to nothing more than a personal declaration and a challenge to a fight.

But other threads provide news, analysis of current news from a wider perspective, and editorial-type overviews with a longer historical context. Others are straight-out opinion pieces, but from people with specific expertise and focuses. Only a fraction of these useful threads would belong in LBN.

My suggestion would be to move threads that are have no new content and/or are, regardless of intent, flame-bait, and ask DUers to help get these moved. This would allow the same two, three, or five people to continues their battle without distracting others who don't find the repetition of talking points particularly enlightening. This also might help to prevent LBN threads from turning into flame-fests, since GD would still be available, at least as a place to start fights, even if they had to continue over in I/P.

[LynneSin]

123. Hey Skinner, can we start a Lieberman forum too

and what will DU's policy be for after that primary regardless of who wins but especially if, god forbid, it's Joe Lieberman?

[rucky]

124. Everything has been hashed out.

and nobody's opinion has changed from it.

Send it to the back of the bus.

[stranger81]

125. it's one of the most important issues of the day

why should it be relegated to a low-traffic forum? Seems like there's value in stimulating discussion amongst a broader audience.

[Maestro]

127. I believe that as long as there is an active

war being waged in the ME it needs to stay in GD. However, more specific Israeli/Palestinian issues need to be in the I/P forum. I guess war news equals GD. Specific Israeli/Palestinian issues need to be in the IP forum.

[Rex]

128. kick

nt

[LSK]

129. while I see why you keep it in a forum, i dont see how you can right now

This is the big news story currently and it could get much worse.

I do see why you keep Israel/Palestine issues to its own forum thou.

[Douglas Carpenter]

130. I think this is just too big and too current for now anyway

later on I suppose moving these discussions to the I/P forum might be a good idea.

[Dead_Parrot]

134. I'd say keep it while it's front-page news

Which is terribly cynical, but probably a good rule of thumb as to how much it's still a developing situation. The day the BBC news front page doesn't mention Lebanon is the day to relegate it back to I/P.

[me b zola]

135. I voted for keeping it in GD, but with a few conditions

Some threads have degenerated into hate fests. Please, the majority of us see things in some shade of gray. I have seen posts that have all but accused posters of being sympathetic to terrorists or anti-Semites if they dare to want to discuss the totality of the situation and ask that both sides stop killing people.

We should be allowed to discuss this in GD, but please send the posts that are only meant to divide us to I/P.

[rman]

137. The debate is of general interest, and the I/P forum is to restrictive

I guess that's a no.

[norml]

138. You can't oppose PNAC, without running into AIPAC.

Not being able to talk about AIPAC and Israel outside of a forum with very restrictive rules, is like not being able to talk about an elephant in the living room, unless you go in the closet to do it, and even then you have to be very careful what you say about the elephant.

[Minnesota Libra]

141. Skinner, YES move it back because some of us are...........

....getting to caught up in defending our side - HELLO been there and doing that - when as someone smarter than I am obviously pointed out this type of conflict has been going on for as long as there have been humans in that area.

I just don't want my side - as partisan as all sides are on this - to get in the way of DU friendships and our willingness to get Liberals/Democrats elected in 06 and 08.

[Jersey Devil]

142. I understand your concern, but I don't see how you can avoid it

Since US foreign policy is so closely tied to the issues in the middle east it seems paramount on the minds of most posters.

[GreenArrow]

143. no, keep it here

and do away with the IP forum. What are those little white "x"es next to each thread title for anyway? Who makes anyone read any thread that they don't wish to?

[Meshuga]

145. It should be up to you mods

not us. If makes no different as far as ease to moderate than I don't see a problem leaving it here but if it is easier to moderate by keeping the discussions in specific forums than the discussion should be moved to I/P.

[blueraven95]

146. What about...

changing the name from I/P to Middle East or even a GD: World Politics (which could be more inclusive and useful in the long run) and relaxing some of the rules, like the ban on polls and pictures, and having everything relate to an article. I know I've seen I/P threads on the Greatest page, so that seems to have changed already. What about, besides this new forum, which would probably be higher traffic, also allowing threads in LBN. Just a thought.

[izzybeans]

150. I said yes because even level headed folks become ignorant fools

on this subject. Send them to the rubber room and they can fight it out with their plastic chew toys.

I'd say the only allowable threads are the ones that call for an end. All the right and wrong boohooery is getting us no where but more embroiled in the mess. And me thinks this is just what the blood thirsty bastards on both sides of the line want.

Each party in the conflict has their own family, set of friends, lovers, colleagues etc. that are in harms way. There personal tragedy does not make their finger pointing valid, it just means they are not in a position to make it stop.

[Quantess]

151. YES!!!

Looking at all the pointless, circuitous, threads about the middle east, I really got to thinking....where's that poll from a few days ago.....so I did a search, and now I'm kicking it to say

yes, can the Israel / Palestine threads get moved out of GD, please?

It is time.

[Ignoramus]

153. Please no.

Being neutral on this issue is being in favor of a pro-Israel bias, because that is the official policy of the democratic party.

This recent violence, and the unbelievable support for it by otherwise supposedly liberal people, has shown me that this issue is central.

[Quantess]

154. here we go again.

:banghead:

[zippy890]

155. me to

:banghead:

[Poll_Blind]

156. Good point. n/t

PB

[cracksquirrel]

157. At this point I don't know what to think

There's been such a bloodletting and outpouring of emotions and accusations and... yeah, I thought I/P dungeon was bad enough, but now that it's in GD it's just this huge emotional crapshoot. I think it's a healthy thing that so many DUers that ordinarily keep silent on the issue are letting their opinions be known on a larger forum, though I have do admit some of the responses have been mildly to downright disturbing.