[rmlew]

Neutrality is fine.
The problem is when Paleocons support all Nationalism but Zionism, borrow liberally from Communist and Islamist attacks against Israel, and use the sheild of perported victimhood to protect recycling of anti-Semitic canards.

[Captain Kennit]

Neoconservatives are far more hypocritical than paleocons on these issues. Witness the neocons treat Islamic terrorism as BAD when it affects Israel, yet GOOD when it affects Serbia. Note that the neocons actually supported the Islamic terrorists in Kosovo, and demanded that Clinton bomb Belgrade back into the Stone Age. Even the most ardent anti-Zionist paleos (and Buchanan is by no means among them) would never actually argue to bomb Israel or even to actively support the Palestinians. Put another, the neocons are the true hypocrites; they view any type of nationalism as BAD, excepting Zionist nationalism. (And their support of American "benevolent global hegemony" is hardly an example of a support of nationalism, as benevolent global hegemony is anything but).

[junta]

You represent a fringe for certain. I am quite familiar with "paleo" thought and have yet to see a call for the end of Israel. So if there is no call for the end of Israel then what you and the fanatics are saying about them and their purported anti-Semitism is patently false. You could be a liar then, I hope then you are not please reform and leave your path of self-destruction.