For those who think that Elizabeth Warren is the liberal candidate that can beat Hillary Clinton, you might want to read this.

During a town hall meeting last week Senator Warren defended her vote to provide $225 millino ins support of Israel in its ongoing conflict with Israel, despite evidence of numerous civilian deaths at the hands of the Israeli army.

This courtesy of the Cape Cod Times: 

"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."

I, like a lot of you I believe, have been somewhat surprised by he unconditional support for Israel coming from  just about everybody, including Joan Rivers, Howard Stern, Seth Rogen, and yes Hillary Clinton,

However it was because of that support that some felt that Clinton was a warmonger out of touch with liberal America, and that a more progressive candidate cloud challenge her for the Democratic nomination and beat her.

Of course for many the person they imagined coming at Clinton from the Left was Elizabeth Warren.

However after reading those statements up above it is clear that Warren is essentially in lockstep with Clinton when it comes to the ongoing conflict in the Gaza Strip.

Personally I think that there is quite a bit of blame for the conflict on both sides, however to blindly support Israel without holding them accountable for the numerous avoidable deaths and their continued encroachment into Palestinian lands is unfair and makes us partly culpable for the deaths yet to come.

There are always two sides to every conflict, and to turn a deaf ear to one, means we care little about really working towards peace in the Middle East.