dtucker300 Loc: Vista, CA

James Carville: If Democrats Lose In November It’s Israel’s Fault

(ConservativeSense.com) – James Carville, the well-known Democratic Party strategist, said during his latest interview that Israel will be to blame if the party loses during the November e******ns.

On Sunday, March 17, Carville appeared on MSNBC and was interviewed by Jen Psaki, former White House press secretary for President Joe Biden who now works for the media outlet with her own show.

During that interview, Carville and Psaki discussed the Israeli response to the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on the Jewish state by the radical Palestinian militant group Hamas. The attack, which k**led around 1,200, sparked a counteroffensive siege of the Gaza Strip to weed out Hamas and rescue hostages taken by the Palestinian group during the Oct. 7 attack. Over 30,000 Palestinians are estimated to have been k**led during Israel’s military response. (Democraps will continue with this lie of over 30,000 dead Gazan Arabs as long as the media lets them. These numbers come from Hamas which has never let a crisis go to waste.)

Carville told the MSNBC host that the “Gaza stuff” isn’t just an issue with a few “snot-nosed Ivy League people,” but a “problem all across the country.” The strategist was referring to the widespread protests that have been ongoing since October of last year, many of which were frequently organized by university students. He said that he hopes President Joe Biden and State Secretary Antony Blinken “can get this thing calmed down.”

Carville warned Biden and Blinken that if the situation isn’t calmed “before the Democratic convention,” the event in Chicago will be “a very ugly time” for the party. “I promise you that,” the strategist added. He predicted that many v**ers will cast uncommitted b****ts due to Biden’s milquetoast stance on the Israeli/Palestine issue, and said the president is aware that it’s “a problem in the party.” Carville said the Biden administration will have to confront Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu soon and tell him they are not willing to lose an e******n because he stands “to go to jail.”

The Democratic strategist also criticized Netanyahu and accused him of “negligence,” recommending the US to put “pressure on him” in every possible way necessary “to de-escalate” the ongoing conflict quickly.

Kevyn

Carville is spot on, he was responsible for much of Clinton’s success at combating the right wing scum going after the Clinton’s. I am happy to see him involved in the campaign, it has been difficult seeing the White House sticking to the high road when they need to go for the throat.

BIRDMAN

🤪🤪🤪🤪

dtucker300 Loc: Vista, CA

Now if we could only get rid of the l*****t scum that has hijacked the "Democrapic" party. Present company included, who never has anything intelligent to add to any conversation. Only opinions that are not grounded in any facts or empirical evidence because of blissful ignorance.

You will be the first one eliminated as a useful i***t by the left when they have complete control. It will happen so fast you won't know what hit you. And there will be no one left to stand up for your right to be as ignorant as you are. It will be too late to do anything about it, leaving you to rot in hell.

microphor Loc: Home is TN

You have to laugh, democrats.Go from blaming other parties, to blaming another country.How stupid can they be

microphor Loc: Home is TN

Carvilla's is the narcissistic scum that you support

dtucker300 Loc: Vista, CA

No, Carville supports the narcissistic scum that Democraps are.

LogicallyRight Loc: Chicago

If the democrats lose, it is the democrats fault.

LogicallyRight Loc: Chicago

Troll alert

microphor Loc: Home is TN

Same difference, takes one to know one

dtucker300 Loc: Vista, CA

According to a Penn Wharton data professor of statistics, the Gaza death toll is statistically impossible.

dtucker300 Loc: Vista, CA

Six of one, half-dozen of the other.

microphor Loc: Home is TN

Yelp

dtucker300 Loc: Vista, CA

https://nationalinterest.org/feature/beware-%E2%80%9Cbody-count%E2%80%9D-foreign-policy-210096?

Beware of “Body Count” Foreign Policy
By Russell Berman via National Interest
In this essay, Russell Berman compares the ratio of combatant to civilian deaths recorded to date in Gaza with that of other major urban warfare operations of the last few decades. He argues that even using the most severe casualty figures available, the Israeli campaign against Hamas is causing fewer civilian deaths per militant k**led than operations in Chechnya, the Syrian Civil War, or the US occupation of Iraq. He urges the Biden administration to stop measuring their responses to the war only through the lens of reported Gazan casualties.

The Israeli campaign in Gaza began as a response to the October 7 attack and its particular brutality. It is wrong, however, to view the Israeli fighting as a case of reciprocal brutality.

by Russell A. Berman Follow @RussellBermanSF on TwitterL

Prominent among the issues at stake in the war in Gaza is the scope of civilian fatalities. This is only natural. Wh**ever the political causes behind the war, human suffering rightly deserves the attention of public opinion and political leaders. For the Biden administration, the rhetoric around the death count in Gaza is taking on ever greater importance. President Joe Biden declared that “you can’t have another 30,000 Palestinians dead,” relying on the widely disseminated figure from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Ministry of Health. Senator Elizabeth Warren similarly blamed “[Israeli] Prime Minister [Benjamin] Netanyahu and his right-wing government” for k*****g “nearly 30,000 Palestinians.” The head of foreign policy for the European Union, Josep Borrell, has invoked the same number but mistakenly claimed that it represents exclusively civilian deaths. In fact, the Gazan authorities do not distinguish between civilians and combatants, so the number 30,000 includes both civilians and combatants.

Any death in war is tragic, especially civilian deaths. No one should make light of these losses. However, American foreign policy decisions appear to be increasingly driven by the rate of fatalities. It is, therefore, worthwhile to take a closer look at the numbers that may be less than they seem and not out of line with other cases of urban warfare.

Serious doubts have been raised concerning the credibility of the Gaza Ministry. Internal inconsistencies in the data, particularly concerning the g****r ratio, suggest that it may be overstating the civilian death rate. In addition, the ministry does not identify which of the civilian deaths were caused by “friendly fire” from Hamas, Islamic Jihad, or other militants. This is far from a trivial factor: not all civilian fatalities in Gaza result from Israeli fire. On this point, it is worth remembering the reports about the rocket strike on the Al-Ahli Hospital on October 17, 2023. The Gazans immediately blamed it on Israel and announced a death tally of 471—well before any credible body count could be carried out—the international press immediately repeated this claim. Yet it quickly turned out that the damage had likely resulted from a misfired Palestinian rocket. Nonetheless, the victims at Al-Ahli are included in the 30,000 total and consequently attributed to the Israeli side, as if Hamas or its allies caused no Gazan deaths.

Despite these significant problems with the Gaza Ministry data, it is worth trying to evaluate the significance of 30,000 deaths, understood to represent a total of military and civilian fatalities. By now, Israel claims to have degraded Hamas’ military capacity by k*****g around 12,000 fighters, therefore putting non-combatant deaths at 18,000. Those figures t***slate into a ratio of military to civilian victims of 1:1.5. Hamas has disputed the size of its losses, conceding only 6,000, which would point to a ratio of 1:4 and approximately 24,000 civilians. In December, when all the casualty figures were lower, the ratio was reportedly 1:2. Wh**ever the precise figures, these ratios represent a narrow range.

Biden seems to want to link U.S. foreign policy to civilian death rates. Therefore, it is useful to compare the numbers in Gaza with civilian death rates elsewhere. This is the only way to determine whether Israeli actions have been, as the president put it, “over the top.”

During the Russian assault on the Chechen capital of Grozny in 1994–95, 25,000-30,000 civilians were k**led, but the count of combatant deaths is difficult to ascertain. During the Battle of Aleppo (2013–2016), civilian deaths numbered higher than 23,604 according to the Violations Documentation Center in Syria, 76 percent of the total fatalities, producing a ratio of 1:3.2. Grozny and Aleppo are comparable to Gaza insofar as both involve the challenges of urban warfare where civilian casualties are sure to be high. The number of non-combatant deaths and the ratio of combatant to non-combatant deaths in Gaza are lower than both examples.

Turning to the Iraq War, determining the ratio of combatant to civilian deaths is complicated due to considerable variation in the counting of non-combatant deaths. The Iraq Family Health Survey cites 150,000 civilian deaths, while the British journal Lancet offers a much higher tally of 600,000. Using the estimate of 23,000 insurgent deaths, the ratio of enemy combatant to civilian deaths ranges between a low of 1:6.5 based on the Iraq Family Survey to a very high 1:26 for the Lancet estimate.

These figures provide context for evaluating the developments in Gaza, where the ratio is likely between 1:15 and 1:4. If one relies on the Lancet data as a metric, one can only conclude that the Israelis are highly scrupulous in limiting civilian harm. Yet even using the lower ratio from the Iraq Family Survey, the Israelis are doing far better than coalition forces in Iraq.

One further reference point with which to frame the Gaza casualty rate is a 2022 report from the United Nations, which describes how, in wartime situations, close to 90 percent of casualties are civilians. Security Council document S/2022/381, a report from the secretary-general on “The Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict,” analyzes conflicts during 2021, stating that “the conduct of hostilities in urban and other populated areas increased the risk of death and injury for civilians.” In these areas, 89 percent of the victims were civilians, i.e., a ratio of 1:9, considerably worse than the casualty rate in Gaza. In other words, by UN metrics, civilian casualties in Gaza are low despite a widespread propaganda offensive claiming the contrary.

The Israeli campaign in Gaza began as a response to the October 7 attack and its particular brutality. It is wrong, however, to view the Israeli fighting as a case of reciprocal brutality. On the contrary, the rate of civilian deaths is comparable to or lower than in other urban warfare settings. There are also indications that the civilian casualty rate is declining further. This evaluation of fatalities is not intended to minimize the real, tragic losses in Gaza. It is, however, grounds for the United States to refrain from making policy decisions based on misunderstood casualty rates or uninformed public debate.