Both current & preceding generations of the Kagan, Kristol & Podhoretz families have written & spoken proudly of the part they played in forming the NeoCon school of foreign policy & elevating it to prominence & influence. As well they should. They have been extremely influential & consequential. I don't question their good intentions. I agree with much of what they espouse. Their intentions are noble. Even when I disagree, I admire their eloquence & humor. I part with them when (imho) they overreach & bring us negative unintended consequences.MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sat Oct 22, 2022 3:36 pmYes, the latter at the end would indeed be irrelevant.old salt wrote: ↑Sat Oct 22, 2022 3:22 pmI chose Soros, Nuland & Applebaum because of their public record. Their actions, writings & statements.MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sat Oct 22, 2022 10:26 amold salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 21, 2022 9:08 pmYou're the one who introduced religion. I was not even aware that Nuland & Applebaum are Jewish. I don't check that when evaluating someone's position. I know that Applebaum married a Polish politician. There'd be a greater chance that they're Catholic or Eastern Orthodox.MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 21, 2022 4:46 pmSorry, you don't get to skate by simply naming one more Jew and claiming "race/religion card" by someone.old salt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 21, 2022 4:29 pmMake it 3. Enjoy this from the brightest at the NeoCon dinner party kiddee table. (I'm a big fan of his, btw)MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 21, 2022 4:15 pm Two more Jews for your blood of children drinking dinner parties in the international cabal.
Got it.
https://www.commentary.org/john-podhore ... rn-crisis/
It's unfortunate that you can't have an honest discussion without playing the race/religion card.
It's a sign of intellectual weakness & a form of bigotry all it's own.
I agreed with the neocons during the Cold War, but they went too far in the aftermath.
These were the folks you put at the "dinner parties where they control the course of history".
Surely there are some non-Jews in your international cabal?
This exchange began with you making an argument in favor of a white Christian nationalist imperialist war criminal and his kleptocracy being rewarded for their aggression against a neighbor trying to move toward western values and democracy and defending their land and their people from atrocities.
With a claim that Ukraine should have taken the path of Belarus, then citing 3 people (just coincidentally) of Jewish Eastern European background as somehow the enemy of what, peace and prosperity, for Christian Eastern Europeans?
Was this all unconscious?
I only know that Soros is because bigots like you cry anti-semitism whenever he's criticized.
I suppose I could find some gentile NeoCons, ...if I gave a sh!t or it mattered to anyone other than you & your fellow race baiters.
Ok, so it was simply "unconscious" that you just happened to choose 3 people with Eastern European Jewish heritage in your "dinner parties where they control the course of history" in reference to a conspiratorial plan in Belarus...(what, to encourage the overthrow of another white christian nationalist dictator?)
I guessed their likely background simply from the trope you employed...as you've done so many times in the past. Took one minute to confirm.
Nuland's parents were Jewish Ukrainian immigrants, Applebaum's family, Jewish Reformed, is originally from Belarus.
But ok, it's "unconscious"...perhaps you are just repeating what you hear others say, who are utilizing these tropes?
But after these many times that I've pointed out to you the through line of anti-semitism in these tropes and how they've been utilized historically continuing through to today by fascist populists, perhaps you could stir yourself to bother to avoid them?
Or not.
I have a tough time giving you an automatic pass, given that the specific use of Soros as the emblem of this trope (in prior eras it might have been "Rothschild") you admit you know well...so, you chose to employ it again, invoking this gruesome bigotry.
Here's the thing, if you really didn't intend this offensive, bigoted meaning.
I dunno how many of our fellow readers on here are Jewish, but I have to assume some are, and many others object as well...a simple apology would be a start and a promise to do one's best to avoid such mistakes going forward.
Or you can choose not to do so.
Their heritage or religion is of no concern to me unless they make it a part of their position. It is irrelevant.
I was unaware of their religion or if they are observant. I've made no reference or implication to their religion or heritage.
I offer no one an apology. To do so would be patronizing. I'm not going to self-censor based on religion when it is irrelevant.
Your hypersensitivity by proxy is laughable. Tragic history of previous generations does not exempt anyone from critque.
I doubt that neocons represent the majority opinion of Jewish Americans, but that, too, is irrelevant.
But when you refer to conspiracies and "dinner parties where they control the course of history" and then, just coincidentally, name 3 people, including one you know is frequently claimed by white nationalists as the center of such global Jewish led conspiracies, well, you just have to know better...
And I think you do know. You're neither stupid nor ignorant.
Did you not know the heritage of the other two and this was just a mistake? I'd be willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, though it's lazy not to have understood the implications given the reference made and the context.
But we all get intellectually lazy at times, we all make mistakes.
Unfortunately, it's not surprising that you wouldn't apologize for this mistake.
It's an interesting thing learned in kindergarten, apologizing for a mistake, an offense given, but one you seem to not have learned or have un-learned since.
You should lose your kindergarten sensitivity. We're all adults here.
The influence wielded by George Soros is not a conspiracy or trope. His record of results demonstrates his relevancy.
His religion does not exempt him from critique.
Applebaum used her dinner party as a literary device. She IS extremely influential. Fair game.